Dataset Information

Improving the management of chronic pain, opioid use, and opioid use disorder in older adults: study protocol for I-COPE study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Older adults with chronic pain, opioid use, and opioid use disorder (OUD) present complex management decisions in primary care. Clinical tools are needed to improve care delivery. This study protocol describes the planned implementation and evaluation of I-COPE (Improving Chicago Older Adult Opioid and Pain Management through Patient-centered Clinical Decision Support and Project ECHO®) to improve care for this population.

Methods

This study uses a pragmatic, expanding cohort stepped-wedge design to assess the outcomes. The study will be implemented in 35 clinical sites across metropolitan Chicago for patients aged ≥ 65 with chronic pain, opioid use, or OUD who receive primary care at one of the clinics. I-COPE includes the integration of patient-reported data on symptoms and preferences, clinical decision support tools, and a shared decision-making tool into routine primary care for more effective management of chronic pain, opioid prescribing, and OUD in older adults. Primary care providers will be trained through web-based videos and an optional Project ECHO® course, entitled "Pain Management and OUD in Older Adults." The RE-AIM framework will be used to assess the I-COPE implementation. Effectiveness outcomes will include an increased variety of recommended pain treatments, decreased prescriptions of higher-risk pain treatments, and decreased patient pain scores. All outcomes will be evaluated 6 and 12 months after implementation. PCPs participating in Project ECHO® will be evaluated on changes in knowledge, attitudes, and self-efficacy using pre- and post-course surveys.

Discussion

This study will provide evidence about the effectiveness of collecting patient-reported data on symptoms and treatment preferences and providing clinical decision support and shared decision-making tools to improve management for older adults with chronic pain, opioid use, and OUD.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04878562 .

SUBMITTER: Kagarmanova A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9327217 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Opinion statementPreventing depression in cancer patients on long-term opioid therapy should begin with depression screening before opioid initiation and repeated screening during treatment. In weighing the high morbidity of depression and opioid use disorder in patients with chronic cancer pain against a dearth of evidence-based therapies studied in this population, patients and clinicians are left to choose among imperfect but necessary treatment options. When possible, we advise engaging psychiatric and pain/palliative specialists through collaborative care models and recommending mindfulness and psychotherapy to all patients with significant depression alongside cancer pain. Medications for depression should be reserved for moderate to severe symptoms. We recommend escitalopram/citalopram or sertraline among selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), or the serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) duloxetine, venlafaxine, or desvenlafaxine if patients have a significant component of neuropathic pain or fibromyalgia. Tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) (consider nortriptyline or desipramine, which have better anticholinergic profiles) should be considered for patients who do not respond to or tolerate SSRI/SNRIs. Existing evidence is inadequate to definitively recommend methylphenidate or novel agents, such as ketamine or psilocybin, as adjunctive treatments for cancer-related depression and pain. Physicians who treat patients with cancer pain should utilize universal precautions to limit the risk of non-medical opioid use (non-medical opioid use). Patients should be screened for non-medical opioid use behaviors at initial consultation and at regular intervals during treatment using a non-judgmental approach that reduces stigma. Co-management with an addiction specialist may be indicated for patients at high risk of non-medical opioid use and opioid use disorder. Buprenorphine and methadone are indicated for the treatment of opioid use disorder, and while they have not been systematically studied for treatment of opioid use disorder in patients with cancer pain, they do provide analgesia for cancer pain. While an interdisciplinary team approach to manage psychological stress may be beneficial, this may not be possible for patients treated outside of comprehensive cancer centers.

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.

Project description:BackgroundOpioid use disorder (OUD) among women delivering at a hospital has increased 400% from 1999-2014 in the United States. From the years 2007 to 2016, opioid-related mortality during pregnancy increased over 200%, and drug-overdose deaths made up nearly 10% of all pregnancy-associated mortality in 2016 in the US. Disproportionately higher rates of neonatal opioid withdrawal syndrome (NOWS) have been reported in rural areas of the country, suggesting that perinatal OUD is a pressing issue among these communities. There is an urgent need for comprehensive, evidence-based treatment services for pregnant women experiencing OUD. The purpose of this article is to describe a study protocol aimed at developing and evaluating a perinatal OUD curriculum, enhancing evidence-based perinatal OUD treatment in a rural setting, and evaluating the implementation of such collaborative care for perinatal OUD.MethodsThis two-year study employed a one group, repeated measures, hybrid type-1 effectiveness-implementation design. This study delivered interventions at 2 levels, both targeting improvement of care for pregnant women with OUD. The first area of focus was at the community healthcare provider-level, which aimed to evaluate the acceptability and feasibility of perinatal OUD education across time and to improve provider education by increasing knowledge specific to: MOUD provision; screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) utilization; and NOWS treatment. The second area of intervention focus was at the patient-level, which assessed the preliminary effect of perinatal OUD provider education in promoting illicit opioid abstinence and treatment engagement among pregnant women with OUD. We adopted constructs from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to assess contextual factors that may influence implementation, and the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) model to comprehensively evaluate implementation outcomes.DiscussionThis article presents the protocol of an implementation study that is employing the CFIR and RE-AIM frameworks to implement and evaluate a perinatal OUD education and service coordination program in two rural counties. This protocol could serve as a model for clinicians and researchers seeking to implement improvements in perinatal care for women with OUD in other rural communities. Trial registration NCT04448015 clinicaltrials.gov.