Dataset Information

Impact of opioid dose escalation on the development of substance use disorders, accidents, self-inflicted injuries, opioid overdoses and alcohol and non-opioid drug-related overdoses: a retrospective cohort study.

ABSTRACT:

Aim

To understand the potential harmful effects of dose escalation among patients with chronic, non-cancer pain (CNCP) on chronic opioid therapy.

Design

Retrospective cohort study.

Setting

United States Veterans Healthcare Administration.

Participants

Veterans with CNCP and on chronic opioid therapy were identified using data from fiscal years 2008-15. The Veteran sample was approximately 90% male and 70% white.

Measurements

Dose escalators [increase of > 20% average morphine milligram equivalent (MME) daily dose] were compared with dose maintainers (change of ±20% average MME daily dose). A composite measure of subsequent substance use disorders (SUDs: opioid, non-opioid and alcohol use disorders) and opioid-related adverse outcomes (AOs: accidents resulting in wounds/injuries, opioid-related and alcohol and non-opioid medication-related accidents and overdoses, self-inflicted injuries) as well as the individual SUDs and AOs was examined. The primary analyses were conducted among a 1 : 1 matched sample of escalators and maintainers matched on propensity score and index date. Propensity scores were generated using demographic characteristics, medical comorbidities, medication and health-care utilization characteristics. Subgroup analyses were conducted by quartile of the propensity score. Sensitivity analyses were conducted using adjusted logistic regression, logistic regression using stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting (SIPTW) and instrumental variable (IV) models using geographic variation in opioid dose escalation as the IV.

Findings

There were 32 420 maintainers and 20 767 escalators resulting in 19 358 (93.2%) matched pairs. Composite AOs [odds ratio (OR) = 1.31, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.23, 1.40], composite SUDs (OR = 1.31, 95% CI = 1.22, 1.41) and individual SUD and AO subtypes were higher among dose escalators, except for opioid-related accidents and overdoses and violence-related injuries. Subgroup analyses within the propensity score quartiles found similar results. Sensitivity analyses with the adjusted and SIPTW logistic regressions found similar results to the primary analyses for all outcomes except for opioid-related accidents and overdoses, which were found to be significantly higher among escalators. Sensitivity analyses with IV models provided mixed results with SUDs and the individual types of AOs.

Conclusion

Escalating the opioid dose for those with chronic, non-cancer pain is associated with increased risks of substance use disorder and opioid-related adverse outcomes.

SUBMITTER: Hayes CJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7263736 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and aimPrescribers are commonly confronted with discontinuing opioid therapy among patients prescribed chronic opioid therapy (COT). This study aimed to measure the association between discontinuing COT and diagnoses of substance use disorders (SUDs) and opioid-related adverse outcomes (AOs).DesignRetrospective cohort study.SettingUnited States Veterans Healthcare Administration.ParticipantsVeterans with chronic pain on COT who discontinued opioid therapy were compared with those continuing COT using data from fiscal years 2009 to 2015.MeasurementsNewly diagnosed substance use disorders (SUD composite; individual types: opioid, non-opioid drug and alcohol use disorders) and opioid-related adverse outcomes (AO composite; individual types: accidents resulting in wounds/injuries, opioid-related accidents/overdoses, alcohol and non-opioid medication-related accidents/overdoses, self-inflicted injuries and violence-related injuries) were evaluated. Primary analyses were conducted using 1:1 matching of discontinuers with those continuing COT based on propensity score and index date (±180-day window). Sensitivity analyses were conducted using logistic regressions with stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting (SIPTW) and instrumental variable (IV) models.FindingsA total of 15 695 (75.4%) and 17 337 (76.6%) discontinuers were matched with those continuing COT among the cohorts testing SUD and AO development respectively. In the primary propensity score matched analyses, the composite SUD outcome was not different between discontinuers and those continuing COT (OR = 0.932, 95% CI = 0.850, 1.022). The composite AO outcome was lower among discontinuers (OR = 0.660, 95% CI = 0.623, 0.699) compared with those continuing COT. SIPTW analyses found lower SUD (OR = 0.789, 95% CI = 0.743, 0.837), and AO (OR = 0.660, 95% CI = 0.623, 0.699) rates among discontinuers. IV models found mixed and sometimes contradictory results.ConclusionsDiscontinuing patients from chronic opioid therapy appears to be associated with decreased diagnoses for opioid-related adverse outcomes. The association with substance use disorders appears to be inconclusive.

Project description:BACKGROUND:North America is in the midst of an unabated opioid overdose epidemic due to the increasing non-medical use of fentanyl and ultra-potent opioids. Naloxone is an effective antidote to opioid toxicity, yet its optimal dosing in the context of fentanyl and ultra-potent opioid overdoses remains unknown. This review aims to determine the relationship between the first empiric dose of naloxone and reversal of toxicity, adverse events, and the total cumulative dose required among patients with undifferentiated opioid overdoses and those with suspected toxicity from ultra-potent opioids. Secondary objectives include evaluating the relationship between the cumulative naloxone dose and toxicity reversal and adverse events, among patients with undifferentiated opioid overdoses and those with suspected toxicity from ultra-potent opioids. METHODS:To identify studies, we will search MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, DARE, CDAG, CINAHL, Science Citation Index, multiple trial registries, and the gray literature. Included studies will evaluate patients with suspected or confirmed opioid toxicity from undifferentiated opioids and ultra-potent opioids, who received an empiric and possibly additional doses of naloxone. The main outcomes of interest are the relationship between naloxone dose and toxicity reversal and adverse events. We will include controlled and non-controlled interventional studies, observational studies, case reports/series, and reports from poison control centers. We will extract data and assess study quality in duplicate with discrepancies resolved by consensus or a third party. We will use the Downs and Black and Cochrane risk of bias tools for observational and randomized controlled studies. If we find sufficient variation in dose, we will fit a random effects one-stage model to estimate a dose-response relationship. We will conduct multiple subgroup analyses, including by type of opioid used and by suspected high and low prevalence of ultra-potent opioid use based on geographic location and time of the original studies. DISCUSSION:Our review will include the most up-to-date available data including ultra-potent opioids to inform the current response to the opioid epidemic, addressing the limitations of recent reviews. We anticipate limitations relating to study heterogeneity. We will disseminate study results widely to update overdose treatment guidelines and naloxone dosing in Take Home Naloxone programs.

Project description:PURPOSE:The study aims to develop and validate algorithms to identify and classify opioid overdoses using claims and other coded data, and clinical text extracted from electronic health records using natural language processing (NLP). METHODS:Primary data were derived from Kaiser Permanente Northwest (2008-2014), an integrated health care system (~n > 475 000 unique individuals per year). Data included International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) codes for nonfatal diagnoses, International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes for fatal events, clinical notes, and prescription medication records. We assessed sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for algorithms relative to medical chart review and conducted assessments of algorithm portability in Kaiser Permanente Washington, Tennessee State Medicaid, and Optum. RESULTS:Code-based algorithm performance was excellent for opioid-related overdoses (sensitivity = 97.2%, specificity = 84.6%) and classification of heroin-involved overdoses (sensitivity = 91.8%, specificity = 99.0%). Performance was acceptable for code-based suicide/suicide attempt classifications (sensitivity = 70.7%, specificity = 90.5%); sensitivity improved with NLP (sensitivity = 78.7%, specificity = 91.0%). Performance was acceptable for the code-based substance abuse-involved classification (sensitivity = 75.3%, specificity = 79.5%); sensitivity improved with the NLP-enhanced algorithm (sensitivity = 80.5%, specificity = 76.3%). The opioid-related overdose algorithm performed well across portability assessment sites, with sensitivity greater than 96% and specificity greater than 84%. Cross-site sensitivity for heroin-involved overdose was greater than 87%, specificity greater than or equal to 99%. CONCLUSIONS:Code-based algorithms developed to detect opioid-related overdoses and classify them according to heroin involvement perform well. Algorithms for classifying suicides/attempts and abuse-related opioid overdoses perform adequately for use for research, particularly given the complexity of classifying such overdoses. The NLP-enhanced algorithms for suicides/suicide attempts and abuse-related overdoses perform significantly better than code-based algorithms and are appropriate for use in settings that have data and capacity to use NLP.

Project description:IntroductionThis research aims to estimate the relative risks of responsibility for a fatal accident linked to driving under the influence of cannabis or alcohol, the prevalence of these influences among drivers and the corresponding attributable risk ratios. A secondary goal is to estimate the same items for three other groups of illicit drugs (amphetamines, cocaine and opiates), and to compare the results to a similar study carried out in France between 2001 and 2003.MethodologyPolice procedures for fatal accidents in Metropolitan France during 2011 were analyzed and 300 characteristics encoded to provide a database of 4,059 drivers. Information on alcohol and four groups of illicit drugs derived from tests for positivity and potential confirmation through blood analysis. The study compares drivers responsible for causing the accident, that is to say having directly contributed to its occurrence, to drivers involved in an accident for which they were not responsible, and who can be assimilated to drivers in general.ResultsThe proportion of persons driving under the influence of alcohol is estimated at 2.1% (95% CI: 1.4-2.8) and under the influence of cannabis at 3.4% (2.9%-3.9%). Drivers under the influence of alcohol are 17.8 times (12.1-26.1) more likely to be responsible for a fatal accident, and the proportion of fatal accidents which would be prevented if no drivers ever exceeded the legal limit for alcohol is estimated at 27.7% (26.0%-29.4%). Drivers under the influence of cannabis multiply their risk of being responsible for causing a fatal accident by 1.65 (1.16-2.34), and the proportion of fatal accidents which would be prevented if no drivers ever drove under the influence of cannabis is estimated at 4.2% (3.7%-4.8%). An increased risk linked to opiate use has also been found to be significant, but with low prevalence, requiring caution in interpreting this finding. Other groups of narcotics have even lower prevalence, and the associated extra risks cannot be assessed.ConclusionAlmost a decade separates the present study from a similar one previously conducted in France, and there have been numerous developments in the intervening years. Even so, the prevalence of drivers responsible for causing fatal accidents under the influence of alcohol or narcotics has stayed remarkably stable, as have the proportion of fatal accidents which could in theory be prevented if no drivers ever exceeded the legal limits. The overall number of deaths from traffic accidents has dropped sharply during this period, and the number of victims attributable to alcohol and/or cannabis declined proportionally. Alcohol remains the main problem in France. It is just as important to note that one in two drivers considered to be under the influence of cannabis was also under the influence of alcohol. With risks cumulating between the two, it is particularly important to point out the danger of consuming them together.