Evaluation of a Safer Opioid Prescribing Protocol (SOPP) for Patients Being Discharged From a Trauma Service.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Baird J
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6727973 | biostudies-literature | 2019 May/Jun
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Evaluation of a Safer Opioid Prescribing Protocol (SOPP) for Patients Being Discharged From a Trauma Service.
Baird Janette J Faul Mark M Green Traci C TC Howland Jonathan J Adams Charles A CA Hodne Melinda J MJ Bohlen Nie N Mello Michael J MJ
Journal of trauma nursing : the official journal of the Society of Trauma Nurses 20190501 3
The aims of this study were to evaluate the effects on opioid medication prescribing, patient opioid safety education, and prescribing of naloxone following implementation of a Safer Opioid Prescribing Protocol (SOPP) as part of the electronic health record (EHR) system at a Level I trauma center. This was a prospective observational study of the EHR of trauma patients pre- (n = 191) and post-(n = 316) SOPP implementation between 2014 and 2016. At a comparison Level I trauma site not implementin ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundContinuing health professions education (CHPE) is an important policy intervention for the opioid epidemic. Besides effectiveness or impact, health policy implementation should be studied to understand how an intervention was delivered within complex environments. Implementation outcomes can be used to help interpret CHPE effects and impacts, help answer questions of "how" and "why" programs work, and inform transferability. We evaluated Safer Opioid Prescribing (SOP), a national CHPE program, using implementation outcomes of reach, dose, fidelity, and participant responsiveness.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective quantitative implementation evaluation of the 2014-2017 cohorts of SOP. To measure reach and dose, we examined participation and completion data. We used Ontario physician demographic data, including regulatory status with respect to controlled substances, to examine relevant trends. To measure fidelity and participant responsiveness, we analyzed participant-provided evaluations of bias, active learning, and relevance to practice. We used descriptive statistics and measures of association for both continuous and categorical variables. We used logistic regression to determine predictors of workshop participation and analysis of covariance to examine variation in satisfaction across different-sized sessions.ResultsReach: In total, there were 472 unique participants, 84.0% of whom were family physicians. Among Ontario physician participants, 90.0% were family physicians with characteristics representative of province-wide demographics. Dose: Webinar completion rate was 86.2% with no differences in completion based on rurality, gender, or controlled substance prescribing status with medical regulatory authorities. Fidelity and participant responsiveness: Nearly all participants rated the three webinars and workshop as balanced, and each element of SOP was also rated as highly relevant to clinical practice.ConclusionsThis evaluation demonstrates that Safer Opioid Prescribing was implemented as intended. Over a short period and without any external funding, the program reached more than 1% of the Ontario physician workforce. This suggests that the program may be a good model for using virtual CHPE to reach a critical mass of prescribers. This study represents a methodological advance of adapting evaluation methods from health policy and complex interventions for continuing health professions education. Future studies will assess effectiveness and impact on opioid prescribing and utilization within evaluation models of complex interventions.
| S-EPMC7880212 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundFacial fractures are painful injuries routinely managed by opioids after surgical repair. Studies have identified patient risk factors and prescribing patterns associated with opioid use in medicine and general surgery; however, little is known about these entities in the facial trauma population.MethodsA retrospective cohort study of opioid-naive patients undergoing surgical repair of facial fractures was conducted using the Truven Health MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters (2006 to 2015) and Medicaid Multi-State Databases (2011 to 2015). Eligible procedures included nasal, nasoorbitoethmoid, orbital, mandible, and Le Fort fracture repair. Opioid type, daily dosage, and prescription duration were analyzed. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to determine independent predictors of prescription refill.ResultsA total of 20,191 patients undergoing surgical repair of facial fractures were identified. Of these, 15,861 patients (78.6 percent) filled a perioperative opioid prescription. Refill (58.7 percent) and potentially inappropriate prescribing (39.4 percent) were common among this population. Patient factors including prior substance use (adjusted OR, 1.84; 95 percent CI, 1.63 to 2.07) and history of mental health disorder (adjusted OR, 1.43; 95 percent CI, 1.06 to 1.91) were independent predictors of refill. Increased odds of refill were seen in patients prescribed tramadol (OR, 1.98; 95 percent CI, 1.48 to 2.66) and those who underwent multiple surgical repairs (OR, 3.38; 95 percent CI, 2.54 to 4.50).ConclusionsRefill and potentially inappropriate prescribing occurred at high rates in facial trauma patients undergoing surgical repair. Additional studies are needed to develop guidelines for proper opioid prescribing in this population.Clinical question/level of evidenceRisk, III.
| S-EPMC7080326 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceLimiting opioid overprescribing in the emergency department (ED) may be associated with decreases in diversion and misuse.ObjectiveTo review and analyze interventions designed to reduce the rate of opioid prescriptions or the quantity prescribed for pain in adults discharged from the ED.Data sourcesMEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials databases and the gray literature were searched from inception to May 15, 2020, with an updated search performed March 6, 2021.Study selectionIntervention studies aimed at reducing opioid prescribing at ED discharge were first screened using titles and abstracts. The full text of the remaining citations was then evaluated against inclusion and exclusion criteria by 2 independent reviewers.Data extraction and synthesisData were extracted independently by 2 reviewers who also assessed the risk of bias. Authors were contacted for missing data. The main meta-analysis was accompanied by intervention category subgroup analyses. All meta-analyses used random-effects models, and heterogeneity was quantified using I2 values.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was the variation in opioid prescription rate and/or prescribed quantity associated with the interventions. Effect sizes were computed separately for interrupted time series (ITS) studies.ResultsSixty-three unique studies were included in the review, and 45 studies had sufficient data to be included in the meta-analysis. A statistically significant reduction in the opioid prescription rate was observed for both ITS (6-month step change, -22.61%; 95% CI, -30.70% to -14.52%) and other (odds ratio, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.45-0.70) study designs. No statistically significant reduction in prescribed opioid quantities was observed for ITS studies (6-month step change, -8.64%; 95% CI, -17.48% to 0.20%), but a small, statistically significant reduction was observed for other study designs (standardized mean difference, -0.30; 95% CI, -0.51 to -0.09). For ITS studies, education, policies, and guideline interventions (6-month step change, -33.31%; 95% CI, -39.67% to -26.94%) were better at reducing the opioid prescription rate compared with prescription drug monitoring programs and laws (6-month step change, -11.18%; 95% CI, -22.34% to -0.03%). Most intervention categories did not reduce prescribed opioid quantities. Insufficient data were available on patient-centered outcomes such as pain relief or patients' satisfaction.Conclusions and relevanceThis systematic review and meta-analysis found that most interventions reduced the opioid prescription rate but not the prescribed opioid quantity for ED-discharged patients. More studies on patient-centered outcomes and using novel approaches to reduce the opioid quantity per prescription are needed.Trial registrationPROSPERO Identifier: CRD42020187251.
| S-EPMC8759006 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background This study evaluated an educational intervention intended to increase physicians' use of patient prescription history information from the state prescription monitoring program (PMP) and their adoption of clinical behaviors consistent with opioid prescription guidelines to reduce patient risk. Methods Physician volunteers (n = 87) in community practices and Veterans Administration medical settings in South Carolina received an office-based, individualized, educational intervention (Academic Detailing) from a trained pharmacist who promoted three key messages about safer opioid prescribing. Physicians were registered for the state PMP, guided through retrieving patient information from the PMP, and given patient-centered materials. Physicians consented to completing web-surveys; 68 (78%) completed follow-up surveys on average 12.2 weeks post-intervention. Results Of 43 respondents who did not use the PMP before the intervention, 83% adopted PMP use. Self-reports also revealed a significant increase in frequency of the following behaviors: 1) using patient report information from the PMP, 2) using a standardized scale to monitor pain intensity and interference with daily functioning, and 3) issuing orders for urine toxicology screens for patients maintained long-term on opioids. Conclusions The intervention was effective in promoting physician adoption of prescribing behaviors intended to reduce risks associated with prescription opioids. The self-report findings of this study should be confirmed by analysis using data on the number of queries submitted to the state's PMP. The present study suggests that a single academic detailing visit may be an effective tool for increasing physician voluntary registration and utilization of data on patients' prescription history contained in a state PMP.
| S-EPMC6237655 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe 2016 U.S. Centers for Disease Control Opioid Prescribing Guideline (CDC Guideline) is currently being revised amid concern that it may be harmful to people with chronic pain on long-term opioid therapy (CP-LTOT). However, a methodology to faithfully implement the CDC guideline, measure prescriber adherence, and systematically test its effect on patient and public health outcomes is lacking. We developed and tested a CDC Guideline implementation strategy (termed TOWER), focusing on an outpatient HIV-focused primary care setting.MethodsTOWER was developed in a stakeholder-engaged, multi-step iterative process within an Information, Motivation and Behavioral Skills (IMB) framework of behavior change. TOWER consists of: 1) a patient-facing opioid management app (OM-App); 2) a progress note template (OM-Note) to guide the office visit; and 3) a primary care provider (PCP) training. TOWER was evaluated in a 9-month, randomized-controlled trial of HIV-PCPs (N = 11) and their patients with HIV and CP-LTOT (N = 40). The primary outcome was CDC Guideline adherence based on electronic health record (EHR) documentation and measured by the validated Safer Opioid Prescribing Evaluation Tool (SOPET). Qualitative data including one-on-one PCP interviews were collected. We also piloted patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) reflective of domains identified as important by stakeholders (pain intensity and function; mood; substance use; medication use and adherence; relationship with provider; stigma and discrimination).ResultsPCPs randomized to TOWER were 48% more CDC Guideline adherent (p < 0.0001) with significant improvements in use of: non-pharmacologic treatments, functional treatment goals, opioid agreements, prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs), opioid benefit/harm assessment, and naloxone prescribing. Qualitative data demonstrated high levels of confidence in conducting these care processes among intervention providers, and that OM-Note supported these efforts while experience with OM-App was mixed. There were no intervention-associated safety concerns (defined as worsening of any of the PROMs).ConclusionsCDC-guideline adherence can be promoted and measured, and is not associated with worsening of outcomes for people with HIV receiving LTOT for CP. Future work would be needed to document scalability of these results and to determine whether CDC-guideline adherence results in a positive effect on public health. Trial registration https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03669939 . Registration date: 9/13/2018.
| S-EPMC9108346 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Many patients approaching the end of their life express the preference to die at home,[1] although unfortunately the majority of people will still die in hospital.[2] For patients approaching the end of their life, it was noted anecdotally that often those who have expressed a preference to go home from hospital for end of life care may have their discharge delayed due to problems in the prescribing of common medications used to alleviate distressing symptoms at the end of life. An initial audit at Conquest Hospital showed an 89% error rate in these prescriptions, mostly related to prescribing controlled drugs such as morphine and midazolam. A single standardised dispensing chart for commonly prescribed medications at the end of life, in the form of both "Just in Case" medications and syringe driver medications, was created which addressed this problem by having the medications pre-written so as to meet all legal requirements for controlled drugs. The prescriber is able to choose and fill out an appropriate drug and dose by using flow-chart information overleaf and then sign the prescription to allow it to be dispensed. After an initial two month pilot period, a re-audit showed a significant fall in error rate down to 11%, as well as an improvement in turnaround time in dispensing the medications.
| S-EPMC4645883 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo determine the proportion of initial opioid prescriptions for opioid-naive patients prescribed by surgeons, dentists, and emergency physicians. We hypothesized that the percentage of such prescriptions grew as scrutiny of primary care and pain medicine opioid prescribing increased and guidelines were developed.Summary of background dataData regarding the types of care for which opioid-naive patients are provided initial opioid prescriptions are limited.MethodsA retrospective cross-sectional study using a nationwide insurance claims dataset to study US adults aged 18 to 64 years. Our primary outcome was a change in opioid prescription share for opioid-naive patients undergoing surgical, emergency, and dental care from 2010 to 2016; we also examined the type and amounts of opioid filled.ResultsFrom 87,941,718 analyzed lives, we identified 16,292,018 opioid prescriptions filled by opioid-naive patients. The proportion of prescriptions for patients receiving surgery, emergency, and dental care increased by 15.8% from 2010 to 2016 (P < 0.001), with the greatest increases related to surgical (18.1%) and dental (67.8%) prescribing. In 2016, surgery patients filled 22.0% of initial prescriptions, emergency medicine patients 13.0%, and dental patients 4.2%. Surgical patients' mean total oral morphine equivalents per prescription increased from 240 mg (SD 509) in 2010 to 403 mg (SD 1369) in 2016 (P < 0.001). Over the study period, surgical patients received the highest proportion of potent opioids (90.2% received hydrocodone or oxycodone).ConclusionsInitial opioid prescribing attributable to surgical and dental care is increasing relative to primary and chronic pain care. Evidence-based guideline development for surgical and dental prescribing is warranted in order to curb iatrogenic opioid morbidity and mortality.
| S-EPMC7047513 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesIt is important to analyze the types of etiologies and provider demographics that drive opioid prescription in our emergency departments. Our study aimed to determine which patients in the ED are receiving opioid prescriptions, as well as their strength and quantity. Secondary outcomes included identifying difference in prescribing between provider classes.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective study at a tertiary care university-based, level-one trauma ED from November 2017 to October 2018. We identified and analyzed data from 2,259 patients who were sent home with an opioid prescription. We retrieved patient and provider demographics, diagnosis, etiologies, and prescription information.ResultsThe mean age of a patient receiving an opioid prescription was 45, and 72.7% of patients were white. The most common diagnosis groups associated with an opioid prescription were abdominal pain (18.5%), nonfracture extremity pain (18.4%), and back/neck pain (12.5%). Hydrocodone-acetaminophen 5-325 mg was the most commonly prescribed (67.4%). The median total prescribed milligram morphine equivalent (MME) was highest for extremity fracture (75.0; IQR 54.0-100.0). The median total prescribed amount of pills was highest for patients with extremity fractures (15.0; IQR 12.0-20.0).ConclusionsOur study elucidates the prescribing patterns of an academic level 1 trauma center and should pave the way for future studies looking to maximize effectiveness at ways to curb ED opioid prescription.
| S-EPMC7837768 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDifferential opioid prescribing patterns have been reported in non-White patient populations. However, these disparities have not been well described among hospitalized medical inpatients.ObjectiveTo describe differences in opioid prescribing patterns among inpatients discharged from the general medicine service based on race/ethnicity.Design, setting, and participantsFor this retrospective study, we performed a multivariable logistic regression for patient race/ethnicity and whether patients received an opioid prescription at discharge and a negative binomial regression for days of opioids prescribed at discharge. The study included all 10,953 inpatients discharged from the general medicine service from June 2012 to November 2018 at University of California San Francisco Medical Center who received opioids during the last 24 hours of their hospitalization.Main outcomes and measuresWe examined two primary outcomes: whether a patient received an opioid prescription at discharge, and, for patients prescribed opioids, the number of days dispensed.ResultsCompared with White patients, Black patients were less likely to receive an opioid prescription at discharge (predicted population rate of 47.6% vs 50.7%; average marginal effect [AME], -3.1%; 95% CI, -5.5% to -0.8%). Asian patients were more likely to receive an opioid prescription on discharge (predicted population rate, 55.6% vs 50.7%; AME, +4.9; 95% CI, 1.5%-8.3%). We also found that Black patients received a shorter duration of opioid days compared with White patients (predicted days of opioids on discharge, 15.7 days vs 17.8 days; AME, -2.1 days; 95% CI, -3.3 to -0.9).ConclusionBlack patients were less likely to receive opioids and received shorter courses at discharge compared with White patients, adjusting for covariates. Asian patients were the most likely to receive an opioid prescription.
| S-EPMC8494281 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceIn March 2020, British Columbia, Canada, became the first jurisdiction globally to launch a large-scale provincewide safer supply policy. The policy allowed individuals with opioid use disorder at high risk of overdose or poisoning to receive pharmaceutical-grade opioids prescribed by a physician or nurse practitioner, but to date, opioid-related outcomes after policy implementation have not been explored.ObjectiveTo investigate the association of British Columbia's Safer Opioid Supply policy with opioid prescribing and opioid-related health outcomes.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study used quarterly province-level data from quarter 1 of 2016 (January 1, 2016) to quarter 1 of 2022 (March 31, 2022), from British Columbia, where the Safer Opioid Supply policy was implemented, and Manitoba and Saskatchewan, where the policy was not implemented (comparison provinces).ExposureSafer Opioid Supply policy implemented in British Columbia in March 2020.Main outcomes and measuresThe main outcomes were rates of prescriptions, claimants, and prescribers of opioids targeted by the Safer Opioid Supply policy (hydromorphone, morphine, oxycodone, and fentanyl); opioid-related poisoning hospitalizations; and deaths from apparent opioid toxicity. Difference-in-differences analysis was used to compare changes in outcomes before and after policy implementation in British Columbia with those in the comparison provinces.ResultsThe Safer Opioid Supply policy was associated with statistically significant increases in rates of opioid prescriptions (2619.6 per 100 000 population; 95% CI, 1322.1-3917.0 per 100 000 population; P < .001) and claimants (176.4 per 100 000 population; 95% CI, 33.5-319.4 per 100 000 population; P = .02). There was no significant change in prescribers (15.7 per 100 000 population; 95% CI, -0.2 to 31.6 per 100 000 population; P = .053). However, the opioid-related poisoning hospitalization rate increased by 3.2 per 100 000 population (95% CI, 0.9-5.6 per 100 000 population; P = .01) after policy implementation. There were no statistically significant changes in deaths from apparent opioid toxicity (1.6 per 100 000 population; 95% CI, -1.3 to 4.5 per 100 000 population; P = .26).Conclusions and relevanceTwo years after its launch, the Safer Opioid Supply policy in British Columbia was associated with higher rates of safer supply opioid prescribing but also with a significant increase in opioid-related poisoning hospitalizations. These findings will help inform ongoing debates about this policy not only in British Columbia but also in other jurisdictions that are contemplating it.
| S-EPMC10792500 | biostudies-literature