Opioid Prescribing Practices and Training Needs of Quebec Family Physicians for Chronic Noncancer Pain.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Roy E
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5555017 | biostudies-other | 2017
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:Chronic pain affects one in five Canadians, and opioids continue to be prescribed to 12.3% of the Canadian population. A survey of family physicians was conducted in 2010 as a baseline prior to the release of the Canadian Opioid Guideline. We repeated the same survey with minor modifications to reflect the updated 2017 opioid prescribing guideline. The online survey was distributed in all provinces and territories in both English and French. There were 265 responses from May 2018 to October 2019, 55% of respondents were male, 16% had advanced training in pain management, 51% had more than 20 years in practice, 54% wrote five or fewer prescriptions of opioids per month, and 58% were confident in their skills in prescribing opioids. Of the 11 knowledge questions, only two were correctly selected by more than 80% of the respondents. Twenty-nine physicians (11%) do not prescribe opioids, and the main factor affecting their decisions were concerns about long-term adverse effects and lack of evidence for effectiveness of opioids in chronic noncancer pain. Of the 12 guideline-concordant practices, only two were performed regularly by 90% or more of the respondents: explain potential harms of long-term opioid therapy and beginning dose of less than 50 mg of morphine equivalent daily. This survey represents a small proportion of family physicians in Canada and its generalizability is limited. However, we identified a number of opioid-related and guideline-specific gaps, as well as barriers and enablers to prescribing opioids and adhering to the guideline.
| S-EPMC7602479 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Pain is common among hospitalized patients. Inpatient prescribing of opioids is not without risk. Acute pain management guidelines could inform safe prescribing of opioids in the hospital and limit associated unintended consequences. PURPOSE:To evaluate the quality and content of existing guidelines for acute, noncancer pain management. DATA SOURCES:The National Guideline Clearinghouse, MEDLINE via PubMed, websites of relevant specialty societies and other organizations, and selected international search engines. STUDY SELECTION:Guidelines published between January 2010 and August 2017 addressing acute, noncancer pain management among adults were considered. Guidelines that focused on chronic pain, specific diseases, and the nonhospital setting were excluded. DATA EXTRACTION:Quality was assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument. DATA SYNTHESIS:Four guidelines met the selection criteria. Most recommendations were based on expert consensus. The guidelines recommended restricting opioids to severe pain or pain that has not responded to nonopioid therapy, using the lowest effective dose of short-acting opioids for the shortest duration possible, and co-prescribing opioids with nonopioid analgesics. The guidelines generally recommended checking the prescription drug monitoring program when prescribing opioids, developing goals for patient recovery, and educating patients regarding the risks and side effects of opioid therapy. Additional recommendations included using an opioid dose conversion guide, avoidance of co-administration of parenteral and oral opioids, and using caution when co-prescribing opioids with other central nervous system depressants. CONCLUSIONS:Guidelines, based largely on expert opinion, recommend judicious prescribing of opioids for severe, acute pain. Future work should assess the implications of these recommendations on hospital-based pain management.
| S-EPMC6278929 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Emergency physicians provide primary care to patients and often prescribe opioids for acutely painful self-limiting conditions. The objective of this study was to describe patterns of opioid prescribing by emergency physicians and family physicians and to explore the relation between setting of initiation of opioid treatment and adverse events over the subsequent 2 years. METHODS:This was a population-based cohort study using administrative data from Ontario. Opioid-naive patients aged 15-64 years who received an opioid prescription for noncancer pain from an emergency or family physician between Apr. 1, 2008, and Mar. 31, 2012 were eligible for inclusion. RESULTS:A total of 34?713 and 45?952 patients were initiated on an opioid by an emergency physicians and family physicians, respectively. Both emergency and family physicians most commonly prescribed codeine-containing products (58.9% and 79.6% of prescriptions, respectively); however, emergency physicians were twice as likely as family physicians to prescribe higher-potency opioids (morphine, oxycodone, hydromorphone, fentanyl, meperidine) (both combination and single-agent preparations) (40.6% v. 19.9%, ? = 20.7, 95% confidence interval [CI] 20.0-21.3). Compared to patients in the family physician group, those in the emergency physician group received significantly higher daily dosages, a higher proportion were initiated on a daily dosage of 100 mg of morphine equivalents (MEQs) or more, and had a hospital admission for opioid toxicity within 2 years (0.5% v. 0.3%, ? = 0.2%, 95% CI 0.1%-0.3%). A higher proportion of patients in the family physician group than in the emergency physician group had dosage escalation beyond 199 mg MEQs within 2 years (0.7% v. 0.1%, ? = 0.6%, 95% CI 0.5%-0.7%). INTERPRETATION:Codeine was the most common opioid prescribed by emergency and family physicians. Compared to patients prescribed opioids by family physicians, those prescribed opioids by emergency physicians received higher initial daily dosages and had an increased likelihood of opioid toxicity.
| S-EPMC5878958 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundLongstanding variation in the views of family physicians (FPs) on the role of opioids seems to translate into widely varying prescribing rates. Improvement interventions are unlikely to achieve change if they do not understand and explicitly target the factors that determine physician prescribing behaviour. The aim of this work was to understand (1) the perspectives of FPs as it relates to opioid prescribing, and (2) the perceived barriers and enablers to guideline-adherent opioid prescribing and management of chronic non-cancer pain.MethodsA qualitative study involving one-on-one, semi-structured interviews with a sample of FPs in Ontario, Canada. Interviews were analyzed using a directed content analysis informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework. A framework approach was used to explore interaction across behavioural determinants (factors influencing behaviour) as well as demographic sources of variation. The behaviour of interest for the current study was the prescribing of opioid medications (including initiation, renewal, and dose reduction) for patients with chronic, non-cancer pain. Associated issues in the overall management of such patients were also explored.ResultsInterviews were conducted with 22 FPs. Behavioural determinants interacted with one another to influence FPs prescribing behavior. The TDF domain Beliefs about Consequences played a central role in explaining physician prescribing behaviours as they related to the management of chronic non-cancer pain. Individual beliefs about prescribing consequences and patient behaviour interacted with prescriber beliefs about capabilities and perceptions of the FP's professional role to influence prescriber behaviour. Emotion and the environmental context influenced the impact of these determinants on opioid prescribing and the management of chronic non-cancer pain.ConclusionsFPs face a wide range of complex (and often interacting) challenges when prescribing opioid therapy to their patients. Solution-based strategies should target these determinants directly using evidence-based strategies that move beyond guideline dissemination and general education. Shared decision-making strategies and patient-facing decision aids are likely to decrease the tension experienced in challenging conversations.
| S-EPMC6511163 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundFew studies have been conducted to explore physicians' prescription practices and attitudes toward the use of cannabinoids in Canada.We measured the prevalence and identified determinants of cannabinoid prescription for the management of chronic noncancer pain among physicians in southwestern Quebec.MethodsIn February 2013, we conducted a postal survey using a modified Dillman method that involved physicians practising in the Abitibi-Témiscamingue region of Quebec. We used multivariate logistic regression models to identify determinants of cannabinoid prescription.ResultsA total of 166 physicians of 318 practising in the region participated in the survey (response rate 52.2%). The prevalence of cannabinoid prescription was 27.3% (45/165) for any indication and 23.0% (38/165) for the management of chronic noncancer pain; 91.1% (41/45) of the physicians prescribed cannabinoids to 5 or fewer patients. Of the 38 physicians who prescribed cannabinoids for chronic noncancer pain, 35 (92.1%) prescribed nabilone, 7 (18.4%) medical marijuana and 2 (5.3%) nabiximols. The principal determinant of cannabinoid prescription was the physician's level of comfort with prescribing cannabinoids (adjusted odds ratio 1.25, 95% confidence interval 1.01-1.55, per 1-point increase in comfort level measured on 10-point scale). Respondents reported that continuing medical education (CME) activities could increase their comfort level. They also indicated a need for guidelines or algorithms that included cannabinoid use as well as more studies about the efficacy and safety of cannabinoids for the management of chronic noncancer pain.InterpretationWe found that cannabinoids were not often prescribed for the management of chronic noncancer pain and that survey respondents were not comfortable with prescribing this drug class. This degree of discomfort could be addressed by CME activities, more effective dissemination of guidelines and more evidence regarding cannabinoid use for the management of chronic noncancer pain.
| S-EPMC4565172 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceThe Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) released the "Guideline For Prescribing Opioids For Chronic Pain" (hereafter, CDC guideline) in 2016, but its association with prescribing practices for patients who are opioid naive is unknown.ObjectiveTo estimate changes in initial prescribing rates, duration, and dosage practices to patients who are opioid naive after the release of the CDC guideline.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study used 6 sequential cohorts to estimate preguideline trends in prescribing among patients who were opioid naive, project that trend forward, and compare it with postguideline prescribing practices. Participants included commercially insured adults without current cancer or hospice care diagnoses and with no past-year opioid claims in the US from 2011 to 2017. All adjusted models were controlled for patient demographics and state-fixed effects. Data were analyzed from January 2020 to May 2021.ExposuresThe release of the CDC guideline.Main outcomes and measuresIndicators of any opioid prescription fills during a 9-month period, the number of days' supply of the initial prescription, and the binary indicator of whether the initial prescription was for 50 or more morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) per day.ResultsThere were 12 870 612 eligible unique patients across cohorts (mean [SD] age in 2016, 51.2 [18.7] years; 6 553 458 [50.9%] women); and the mean (SD) age of the cohorts increased annually, from 48.7 (17.9) years in the April 2011 to December 2012 cohort to 51.9 (19.2) years in the April 2016 to December 2017 cohort. The postguideline prescribing prevalence was 532 962 of 5 834 088 individuals (9.1%), which exceeded that projected from the preguideline trend, estimated at 9.0% (95% CI, 9.0%-9.1%). Among patients receiving prescriptions during follow-up, adjusted mean days' supply was 4.7% (95% CI, 4.3%-5.1%) lower in the first year after release of the guideline and 9.8% (95% CI, 9.3%-10.3%) lower in the second year after release, compared with the expected rate from the preguideline trend. The adjusted odds of receiving a high-dose (ie, ≥50 MME/d) initial prescription were lower in the first year (odds ratio, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.96-0.98) and in the second year (odds ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.93-0.96) after the release of the CDC guideline compared with the odds expected from the preguideline trend.Conclusions and relevanceThis cohort study found that patients who were opioid naive continued to initiate opioid therapy after the release of opioid prescribing guidelines by the CDC, but trends in prescribing duration reversed and decreased, after increasing in each of 4 preguideline cohorts examined. High-dose prescribing rates were already decreasing, but those trends accelerated after the CDC guideline release. These results suggest that nonmandatory, evidence-based guidelines from trusted sources were associated with prescribing practices. Guideline-concordant care has potential to improve pain management and reduce opioid-related harms.
| S-EPMC8278262 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background:Physician adherence to guideline recommendations for the use of opioids to manage chronic pain is often limited. Objective:In February 2018, we administered a 28-item online survey to explore perceptions of the 2017 Canadian guideline for opioid therapy and chronic noncancer pain and if physicians had altered practices in response to recommendations. Results:We invited 34,322 Canadian physicians to complete our survey, and 1,128 responded for a response rate of 3%; 687 respondents indicated they prescribed opioids for noncancer pain and answered survey questions about the guideline and their practice. Almost all were aware of the guideline, 94% had read the document, and 89% endorsed the clarity as good or excellent. The majority (86%) felt the guideline was feasible to implement, but 66% highlighted resistance by patients, and 63% the lack of access to effective nonopioid treatment as barriers. Thirty-six percent of respondents mistakenly believed the guideline recommended mandatory tapering for patients using high-dose opioid therapy (≥90 mg morphine equivalent per day), and 58% felt they would benefit from support for opioid tapering. Seventy percent of respondents had changed practices to align with guideline recommendations, with 51% engaging some high-dose patients in opioid tapering and 43% reducing the number of new opioid starts. Conclusion:There was high awareness of the 2017 Canadian opioid guideline among respondents, and preliminary evidence that recommendations have changed practice to better align with the evidence. Ongoing education is required to avoid the misunderstanding that opioid tapering is mandatory, and research to identify effective strategies to manage chronic noncancer pain is urgently needed.
| S-EPMC7048936 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe aim of this study was to investigate trends in the prevalence of potentially inappropriate opioid prescribing (PIOP) and identify potential risk factors among Korean noncancer patients.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional study of annual national patient sample data from the Korean Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service (HIRA-NPS) for the period 2012-2018. Noncancer patients who were prescribed non-injectable opioid analgesics (NIOAs) at least once were included. The proportion of patients with at least one PIOP in terms of concurrent use of benzodiazepines or gabapentinoids, substance use disorder, treatment duration, and dosage was evaluated. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify the risk factors associated with PIOP.ResultsOf the 9,772,503 noncancer patients, 1,583,444 (16.2%) were prescribed NIOAs at least once. Among them, 15.7% were exposed to PIOP, and the prevalence was much higher (31.6%) in the elderly group (age: ⩾65 years). The prevalence of PIOP increased 1.1-fold over 7 years (14.8-16.8%) among the total NIOA users and was more pronounced in non-tramadol NIOA users (a 1.5-fold increase, from 13.2% to 19.4%). Multivariable logistic regression indicated that older age, beneficiaries of medical aid or national meritorious service, exposure to polypharmacy, psychological disorder, chronic pain indication, and concomitant sedative use were independently associated with higher odds of PIOP.Discussion and conclusionWe found that the prevalence of PIOP was 15.7% among Korean noncancer patients, and it increased over the 7-year study period. This increasing trend is alarming because it was more drastic with non-tramadol NIOAs compared with that with tramadol. Several patient-level risk factors associated with PIOP would be useful in targeted management strategies for the safe use of opioids.Plain language summaryPotentially inappropriate opioid prescribing and related risk factors among noncancer patients prescribed non-injectable opioids in Korea In Korea, the prevalence of non-injectable opioid analgesic (NIOA) use in noncancer patients steadily increased from 15.3% in 2012 to 17.1% in 2018.Also, the prevalence of potentially inappropriate opioid prescribing (PIOP) increased from 14.8% in 2012 to 16.8% in 2018.The following factors were associated with a markedly increased risk of PIOP: age, beneficiaries of medical aid or national meritorious service, polypharmacy, psychological disorder, chronic pain, and concomitant medications.
| S-EPMC9058459 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Little is known about changes in pain intensity that may occur after discontinuation of long-term opioid therapy (LTOT). The objective of this study was to characterize pain intensity after opioid discontinuation over 12 months. This retrospective U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) administrative data study identified N = 551 patients nationally who discontinued LTOT. Data over 24 months (12 months before and after discontinuation) were abstracted from VA administrative records. Random-effects regression analyses examined changes in 0 to 10 pain numeric rating scale scores over time, whereas growth mixture models delineated pain trajectory subgroups. Mean estimated pain at the time of opioid discontinuation was 4.9. Changes in pain after discontinuation were characterized by slight but statistically nonsignificant declines in pain intensity over 12 months after discontinuation (B = -0.20, P = 0.14). Follow-up growth mixture models identified 4 pain trajectory classes characterized by the following postdiscontinuation pain levels: no pain (average pain at discontinuation = 0.37), mild clinically significant pain (average pain = 3.90), moderate clinically significant pain (average pain = 6.33), and severe clinically significant pain (average pain = 8.23). Similar to the overall sample, pain trajectories in each of the 4 classes were characterized by slight reductions in pain over time, with patients in the mild and moderate pain trajectory categories experiencing the greatest pain reductions after discontinuation (B = -0.11, P = 0.05 and B = -0.11, P = 0.04, respectively). Pain intensity after discontinuation of LTOT does not, on average, worsen for patients and may slightly improve, particularly for patients with mild-to-moderate pain at the time of discontinuation. Clinicians should consider these findings when discussing risks of opioid therapy and potential benefits of opioid taper with patients.
| S-EPMC6993952 | 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