Consensus-Based Treatment Approaches for Managing Concerning Behaviors in Patients on Long-term Opioid Therapy for Chronic Pain: Case-Based Applications.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Becker WC
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6124322 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jun
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Consensus-Based Treatment Approaches for Managing Concerning Behaviors in Patients on Long-term Opioid Therapy for Chronic Pain: Case-Based Applications.
Becker William C WC Edelman E Jennifer EJ Starrels Joanna L JL Azari Soraya S Roy Payel P Young Sarah R SR Liebschutz Jane J Merlin Jessica S JS
Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes 20180503 2
Guidelines recommend careful monitoring of patients on long-term opioid therapy for chronic pain to assess for concerning medication-taking behaviors that may signal opioid misuse or the presence of a substance use disorder. However, specific management strategies to guide providers if concerning medication-taking behaviors emerge are lacking. Therefore, we recruited a Delphi panel-42 experts in chronic pain and opioid prescribing-to develop consensus-based treatment approaches to guide manageme ...[more]
Similar Datasets
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.
| S-EPMC5789105 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundClinicians treating cancer-related pain with opioids regularly encounter nonmedical stimulant use (i.e., methamphetamine, cocaine), yet there is little evidence-based management guidance. The aim of the study is to identify expert consensus on opioid management strategies for an individual with advanced cancer and cancer-related pain with nonmedical stimulant use according to prognosis.MethodsThe authors conducted two modified Delphi panels with palliative care and addiction experts. In Panel A, the patient's prognosis was weeks to months and in Panel B the prognosis was months to years. Experts reviewed, rated, and commented on the case using a 9-point Likert scale from 1 (very inappropriate) to 9 (very appropriate) and explained their responses. The authors applied the three-step analytical approach outlined in the RAND/UCLA to determine consensus and level of clinical appropriateness of management strategies. To better conceptualize the quantitative results, they thematically analyzed and coded participant comments.ResultsConsensus was achieved for all management strategies. The 120 Experts were mostly women (47 [62%]), White (94 [78%]), and physicians (115 [96%]). For a patient with cancer-related and nonmedical stimulant use, regardless of prognosis, it was deemed appropriate to continue opioids, increase monitoring, and avoid opioid tapering. Buprenorphine/naloxone transition was inappropriate for a patient with a short prognosis and of uncertain appropriateness for a patient with a longer prognosis.ConclusionStudy findings provide urgently needed consensus-based guidance for clinicians managing cancer-related pain in the context of stimulant use and highlight a critical need to develop management strategies to address stimulant use disorder in people with cancer.Plain language summaryAmong palliative care and addiction experts, regardless of prognosis, it was deemed appropriate to continue opioids, increase monitoring, and avoid opioid tapering in the context of cancer-related pain and nonmedical stimulant use. Buprenorphine/naloxone transition as a harm reduction measure was inappropriate for a patient with a short prognosis and of uncertain appropriateness for a patient with a longer prognosis.
| S-EPMC10910244 | biostudies-literature
Project description:An improved understanding of behaviors reflecting acute pain in cats is a priority for feline welfare. The aim of this study was to create and validate a comprehensive ethogram of acute pain behaviors in cats that can discriminate painful versus non-painful individuals. An inventory of behaviors (ethogram) with their respective descriptors was created based on a literature review of PubMed, Web of Science and CAB Abstracts databases. The ethogram was divided into ten behavior categories that could be evaluated by duration and/or frequency: position in the cage, exploratory behaviors, activity, posture and body position, affective-emotional states, vocalization, playing (with an object), feeding, post-feeding and facial expressions/features. Thirty-six behaviors were analyzed independently by four veterinarians with postgraduate qualifications in feline medicine and/or behavior as (1) not relevant, (2) somewhat relevant, (3) quite relevant or (4) highly relevant and used for content (I-CVI) and face validity. Items with I-CVI scores > 0.67 were included. Twenty-four behaviors were included in the final ethogram. Thirteen items presented full agreement (i.e., I-CVI = 1): positioned in the back of the cage, no attention to surroundings, feigned sleep, grooming, attention to wound, crouched/hunched, abnormal gait, depressed, difficulty grasping food, head shaking, eye squinting, blepharospasm and lowered head position. Seven descriptors were reworded according to expert suggestions. The final ethogram provides a detailed description of acute pain behaviors in cats after content and face validity and can be applied to the characterization of different acute painful conditions in hospitalized cats.
| S-EPMC10538801 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceOpioid misuse and opioid use disorder (OUD) are important comorbidities in people with advanced cancer and cancer-related pain, but there is a lack of consensus on treatment.ObjectiveTo develop consensus among palliative care and addiction specialists on the appropriateness of various opioid management strategies in individuals with advanced cancer-related pain and opioid misuse or OUD.Design, setting, and participantsFor this qualitative study, using ExpertLens, an online platform and methodology for conducting modified Delphi panels, between August and October 2020, we conducted 2 modified Delphi panels to understand the perspectives of palliative and addiction clinicians on 3 common clinical scenarios varying by prognosis (weeks to months vs months to years). Of the 129 invited palliative or addiction medicine specialists, 120 participated in at least 1 round. A total of 84 participated in all 3 rounds.Main outcomes and measuresConsensus was investigated for 3 clinical scenarios: (1) a patient with a history of an untreated opioid use disorder, (2) a patient taking more opioid than prescribed, and (3) a patient using nonprescribed benzodiazepines.ResultsParticipants were mostly women (47 [62%]), White (94 (78 [65%]), and held MD/DO degrees (115 [96%]). For a patient with untreated OUD, regardless of prognosis, it was deemed appropriate to begin treatment with buprenorphine/naloxone and inappropriate to refer to a methadone clinic. Beginning split-dose methadone was deemed appropriate for patients with shorter prognoses and of uncertain appropriateness for those with longer prognoses. Beginning a full opioid agonist was deemed of uncertain appropriateness for those with a short prognosis and inappropriate for those with a longer prognosis. Regardless of prognosis, for a patient with no medical history of OUD taking more opioids than prescribed, it was deemed appropriate to increase monitoring, inappropriate to taper opioids, and of uncertain appropriateness to increase the patient's opioids or transition to buprenorphine/naloxone. For a patient with a urine drug test positive for non-prescribed benzodiazepines, regardless of prognosis, it was deemed appropriate to increase monitoring, inappropriate to taper opioids and prescribe buprenorphine/naloxone.Conclusions and relevanceThe findings of this qualitative study provide urgently needed consensus-based guidance for clinicians and highlight critical research and policy gaps.
| S-EPMC9247858 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionManagement of opioid misuse and opioid use disorder (OUD) among individuals with serious illness is an important yet understudied issue. Palliative care clinicians caring for individuals with serious illness, many of whom may live for months or years, describe a complex tension between weighing the benefits of opioids, which are considered a cornerstone of pain management in serious illness, and serious opioid-related harms like opioid misuse and OUD. And yet, little literature exists to inform the management of opioid misuse and OUDs among individuals with serious illness. Our objective is to provide evidence-based management guidance to clinicians caring for individuals with serious illness who develop opioid misuse or OUD.Methods and analysisWe chose a modified Delphi approach, which is appropriate when empirical evidence is lacking and expert input must be used to shape clinical guidance. We sought to recruit 60 clinicians with expertise in palliative care, addiction or both to participate in this study. We created seven patient cases that capture important management challenges in individuals with serious illness prescribed opioid therapy. We used ExpertLens, an online platform for conducting modified Delphi panels. Participants completed three rounds of data collection. In round 1, they rated and commented on the appropriateness of management choices for cases. In round 2, participants reviewed and discussed their own and other participants' round 1 numerical responses and comments. In round 3 (currently ongoing), participants again reviewed rounds 1 and 2, and are allowed to change their final numerical responses. We used ExpertLens to automatically identify whether there is consensus, or disagreement, among responses in panels. Only round 3 responses will be used to assess final consensus and disagreement.Ethics and disseminationThis project received ethical approval from the University of Pittsburgh's Institutional Review Board (study 19110301) and the RAND Institutional Research Board (study 2020-0142). Guidance from this work will be disseminated through national stakeholder networks to gain buy-in and endorsement. This study will also form the basis of an implementation toolkit for clinicians caring for individuals with serious illness who are at risk of opioid misuse or OUD.
| S-EPMC8137210 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PURPOSE:Pain in the neonate is often challenging to assess but important to control. Physicians often must balance the need for optimal pain control with the need to minimize oversedation and prolonged opioid use. Both inadequate pain control and overuse of opioids can have long-term consequences, including poor developmental outcomes. The aim of this review is to introduce a comprehensive approach to pain management for physicians, nurses, and surgeons caring for critically ill neonates, focusing on nonopioid alternatives to manage procedural pain. FINDINGS:After review, categories of opioid-sparing interventions identified included (1) nonopioid pharmacologic agents, (2) local and regional anesthesia, and (3) nonpharmacologic alternatives. Nonopioid pharmacologic agents identified for neonatal use included acetaminophen, NSAIDs, dexmedetomidine, and gabapentin. Local and regional anesthesia included neuraxial blockade (spinals and epidurals), subcutaneous injections, and topical anesthesia. Nonpharmacologic agents uniquely available in the neonatal setting included skin-to-skin care, facilitated tucking, sucrose, breastfeeding, and nonnutritive sucking. IMPLICATIONS:The use of various pharmacologic and interventional treatments for neonatal pain management allows for the incorporation of opioid-sparing techniques in neonates who are already at risk for poor neurodevelopmental outcomes. A multifactorial approach to pain control is paramount to optimize periprocedural comfort and to minimize the negative sequelae of uncontrolled pain in the neonate.
| S-EPMC6790974 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Introduction:The opioid epidemic has awakened educators to the insufficiency of training in the areas of pain management and substance use disorders within the curricula of health sciences schools. The University of Pittsburgh Center of Excellence in Pain Education created an online educational module focusing on factors contributing to the opioid epidemic and the role of robust interprofessional communication in avoiding common practitioner errors. Methods:The 1-hour module created by an interprofessional team comprised a pretest, video presentation featuring case vignettes, posttest, and learner satisfaction survey. The content of the module focused on four core concepts: (1) managing acute perioperative pain, (2) maximizing opioid safety, and (3) identifying and (4) managing suspected opioid abuse and diversion. Results:Data were obtained from 250 dental, pharmacy, and nursing students from the University of Pittsburgh who completed the module as part of their respective profession-specific curricula. Results collapsed across the three school-specific implementations indicated an average increase in knowledge test scores from pre- to posttest (Z = -8.82, p < .001). In addition, the learner satisfaction data revealed an overall positive response to the module, with students commenting that they enjoyed the module and felt it provided them with a valuable learning experience. Discussion:Learner outcomes and feedback suggest that our interprofessional team was successful in creating an effective learning module applicable to several health care professions, namely, pharmacy, dentistry, and nursing. Future studies might address the application of the knowledge gained to actual patient care.
| S-EPMC6953741 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The intersection of pain, addiction and mental health has not been adequately described. We describe the roles of these three conditions in a chronic pain patient population using opioid analgesics. Aims were to improve our understanding of this population as well as to explore ways of identifying different types of patients.We conducted a retrospective cohort study in a large integrated group medical practice in Washington State with persons using opioids chronically (n=704). Patient classes were derived with latent class analysis using factors representing DSM-IV opioid abuse and dependence, opioid misuse, pain, anxiety and depression. Regression analyses explored the utility of automated and interview data to distinguish the empirically derived patient groups.Three classes were identified: a Typical group, the substantial majority that had persistent, moderate mental health and pain symptoms; an Addictive Behaviors group with elevated mental health symptoms and opioid problems, but pain similar to the Typical class; and a Pain Dysfunction class with significantly higher pain interference as well as elevated mental health and opioid problems. Prescribed average daily dose of opioids was three times higher for those in the two atypical groups and was strongly associated with class membership after adjusting for other variables.We describe three distinct types of patient classes as well as data elements that could help identify the two atypical types. Further research is needed to confirm these findings and determine the utility of this approach in other clinical settings.
| S-EPMC2716214 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundManaging acute pain in patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) on medication (methadone, buprenorphine, or naltrexone) can be complicated by patients' higher baseline pain sensitivity and need for higher opioid doses to achieve pain relief. This review aims to evaluate the benefits and harms of acute pain management strategies for patients taking OUD medications and whether strategies vary by OUD medication type or cause of acute pain.MethodsWe systematically searched multiple bibliographic sources until April 2020. One reviewer used prespecified criteria to assess articles for inclusion, extract data, rate study quality, and grade our confidence in the body of evidence, all with second reviewer checking.ResultsWe identified 12 observational studies-3 with control groups and 9 without. Two of the studies with control groups suggest that continuing buprenorphine and methadone in OUD patients after surgery may reduce the need for additional opioids and that ineffective pain management in patients taking methadone can result in disengagement in care. A third controlled study found that patients taking OUD medications may need higher doses of additional opioids for pain control, but provided insufficient detail to apply results to clinic practice. The only case study examining naltrexone reported that postoperative pain was managed using tramadol. We have low confidence in these findings as no studies directly addressed our question by comparing pain management strategies and few provided adequate descriptions of the dosage, timing, or rationale for clinical decisions.DiscussionWe lack rigorous evidence on acute pain management in patients taking medication for OUD; however, evidence supports the practice of continuing methadone or buprenorphine for most patients during acute pain episodes. Well-described, prospective studies of adjuvant pain management strategies when OUD medications are continued would add to the existing literature base. Studies on nonopioid treatments are also needed for patients taking naltrexone.Protocol registrationPROSPERO; CRD42019132924.
| S-EPMC7728869 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesOne in 5 people in the United States lives with chronic pain. Many patients with chronic pain experience a subset of specific co-occurring pain conditions that may share a common pain mechanism and that have been designated as chronic overlapping pain conditions (COPCs). Little is known about chronic opioid prescribing patterns among patients with COPCs in primary care settings, especially among socioeconomically vulnerable patients. This study aims to evaluate opioid prescribing among patients with COPCs in US community health centers and to identify individual COPCs and their combinations that are associated with long-term opioid treatment (LOT).Study designRetrospective cohort study.MethodsWe conducted analyses of more than 1 million patients 18 years and older based on electronic health record data from 449 US community health centers across 17 states between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2018. Logistic regression models were used to assess the relationship between COPCs and LOT.ResultsIndividuals with COPCs were prescribed LOT 4 times more often than individuals without a COPC (16.9% vs 4.0%). The presence of chronic low back pain, migraine headache, fibromyalgia, or irritable bowel syndrome combined with any of the other COPCs increased the odds of LOT prescribing compared with the presence of a single COPC.ConclusionsAlthough LOT prescribing has declined over time, it remains relatively high among patients with certain COPCs and for those with multiple COPCs. These study findings suggest target populations for future interventions to manage chronic pain among socioeconomically vulnerable patients.
| S-EPMC10516299 | biostudies-literature