Increased frequency of urine drug testing in chronic opioid therapy: rationale for strategies for enhancing patient adherence and safety.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the average amount of time required to detect opioid aberrancy based upon varying frequencies of urine drug testing (UDT) in a community-based, tertiary care pain management center. SUBJECTS: This study was a retrospective analysis of 513 consecutive patients enrolled in a medication management program, receiving chronic opioid therapy between January 1, 2018 and December 31, 2018. METHODS: Data were extracted from medical records including age at start of the study period, sex, ethnicity, marital status, and smoking status. UDT was performed at each prescribing visit via semi-quantitative immunoassay, and at the discretion of the clinician, a sample was sent for external confirmation using gas chromatography or mass spectrometry testing to clarify questions of inconsistency with patients' reports or prescribed medications. For purposes of the study, "opioid aberrancy" was defined through inconsistent UDT. RESULTS: One hundred and fifteen patients (22.4%) had at least one inconsistent UDT during the study period, and 160 (2.8%) of all UDTs were inconsistent. At this rate of inconsistency, it was determined that with monthly screening, it would require up to 36 months to detect a single aberrancy, and semi-annual testing would require as long as 216 months to detect an aberrancy. CONCLUSIONS: More frequent UDT can be helpful in terms of earlier detection of opioid aberrancy. This has significant implications for helping avoid misuse, overdose, and potential diversion. Furthermore, early detection will ideally result in earlier implementation of treatment of the emotional and behavioral factors causing aberrancy. Such early intervention is more likely to be successful in terms of reducing substance misuse in a chronic pain population, providing a higher degree of patient adherence and safety, as well as producing superior overall patient outcomes. Finally, economic benefits may include substantial savings through avoidance of the necessity for drug rehabilitation and the empirically established higher costs of treating opioid misuse comorbidities.

The World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule-2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) in a chronic pain population being considered for chronic opioid therapy.

PURPOSE: To examine the validity of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) for the assessment of function in a community-based sample of patients with chronic pain conditions undergoing evaluation for chronic opioid therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred nine of 124 patients were evaluated for a chronic opioid therapy program between December 1, 2014 and April 10, 2015, inclusive, at one community-based interdisciplinary pain management practice. Measures included: demographic data; the WHODAS 2.0; a modified version of the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ-m); the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 item (PHQ-9); the Screener and Opioid Assessment for Patients with Pain-Revised (SOAPP-R); the Current Opioid Misuse Measure (COMM), the Opioid Risk Tool (ORT); opioid dose. These data were collected as part of routine care, and this retrospective chart review study examined the data from this convenience sample, comparing the results of each assessment tool to the results of the WHODAS 2.0. RESULTS: Median score on the WHODAS 2.0 was 25.69 (IQR=16.01 to 35.28). WHODAS 2.0 score was significantly correlated with the RMDQ-m (rs=0.69, p<0.001), the PHQ-9 (rs=0.68, p<0.001), the COMM (rs=0.52, p<0.001) and the SOAPP-R (rs=0.51, p<0.001). There was no significant correlation between the WHODAS 2.0 and the ORT (rs=0.14, p=0.12) or opioid dose (rs=0.07, p=0.47). CONCLUSIONS: The WHODAS 2.0 was significantly positively correlated with other measures, including measures of disability, risk of opioid misuse, and depression among patients being evaluated for chronic opioid therapy. The WHODAS 2.0 may be a useful measure of disability across a number of important domains when discussing expectations of both patients and providers at initiation of opioid therapy for chronic pain management. This assessment and discussion is crucial, particularly given the focus on function, rather than analgesia alone, when evaluating the effectiveness of opioid treatment.

Relationships Between Opioid Dosing, Pain Severity, and Disability in a Community-Based Chronic Pain Population: An Exploratory Retrospective Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the relationship between opioid dose change, pain severity, and function in patients with chronic pain. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Community interdisciplinary pain management practice. SUBJECTS: A total of 778 patients with chronic pain prescribed opioids for three or more consecutive months between April 1, 2013, and March 1, 2015. METHODS: Changes in opioid dose, pain severity rating, modified Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire score, and opioid risk data were extracted from medical records and analyzed for associations. RESULTS: Two hundred forty-three subjects (31.2%) had an overall dose decrease, 223 (28.7%) had a dose increase, and 312 (40.1%) had no significant change in dose (<20% change). There was a weak negative correlation between change in opioid dose and change in pain severity (r = -0.08, P = 0.04) but no association between change in disability scores and dose change (N = 526, P = 0.13). There was a weak positive correlation between change in pain severity rating and change in disability scores (r = 0.16, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that escalating opioid doses may not necessarily result in clinically significant improvement of pain or disability. Similarly, significant opioid dose reductions may not necessarily result in worsened pain or disability. This exploratory investigation raised questions of possible subgroups of patients who might demonstrate improvement of pain and disability with opioid dose adjustments, and further research should prospectively explore this potential, given the limitations inherent in retrospective analyses. Prescribers should still consider reduction of opioid doses as recommended by current guidelines, in an effort to mitigate the potential risks associated with high-dose treatment.

10 kHz spinal cord stimulation: a retrospective analysis of real-world data from a community-based, interdisciplinary pain facility.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate clinical outcomes and health care utilization at 12 months post spinal cord stimulator (SCS) implantation compared with baseline and a matched sample of patients receiving conventional medical management (CMM) for the treatment of low back and lower extremity pain. PATIENTS: A retrospective study of patients with at least 24 months of active treatment at an interdisciplinary community pain center between December 1, 2014 and December 31, 2017. Thirty-two patients receiving implantation of a high-frequency (10 kHz) SCS and 64 patients receiving CMM were identified through propensity matching at a ratio of 2:1. METHODS: Data were extracted from medical records, including pain severity, prescribed opioid dose in morphine milligram equivalents, patient perception of disability, and volume of interventional pain procedures and total office visits to the pain center. RESULTS: Reductions in opioid dose were significantly greater for the SCS group than the CMM group. The 26.2 mg morphine equivalent dose reduction represents a 28% reduction from baseline, with 71.4% of those prescribed opioids in the SCS group reducing their dose at 12 months post-implant. Among those with SCS, there were significant within-group reductions in numerical pain score for low back and lower extremity pain, reducing by 46.2% and 50.9% from baseline, respectively. Change in functional pain score was not significant for either SCS group or CMM. Both groups had significant within-group reduction in disability. Reduction of interventional procedure volume was significant for both groups with a greater reduction observed in the SCS group. Office visit volume reduction was significant for the CMM group, but this was not a significant difference from the SCS group. CONCLUSIONS: Results support the efficacy of 10 kHz SCS for analgesia, reduction of opioid utilization, reduction of interventional pain procedures, and patient perception of disability.

The Association Between Cannabis Use and Aberrant Behaviors During Chronic Opioid Therapy for Chronic Pain.

Objective: Health care providers are likely to see an increase in the concomitant use of cannabis and opioids, particularly with the increased liberalization and ongoing research into the possible role of medical marijuana for chronic pain. Recent literature reports a prevalence of concurrent use ranging from 8.9% to 31.8%. The primary aim of this study was to determine the relationship between cannabis use and aberrant drug behaviors in noncancer pain patients receiving chronic opioid therapy. Design: Retrospective chart review. Setting: Community-based, interdisciplinary pain management center. Subjects: Data from 209 patients who were evaluated for a medication management program between October 1, 2011, and January 1, 2014, and met inclusion criteria. Forty-four were positive for cannabis in their initial random urine drug toxicology. Methods: Data from electronic health records, including demographics, urine drug toxicology, disability, opioid dose, opioid risk assessment data, and pain severity were analyzed to examine differences among cannabis users and noncannabis users. Results: Subjects with cannabis in their initial urine drug toxicology were more likely to have a future occurrence of an opioid-related aberrancy (P < 0.001), be male (P = 0.047), have a history of substance abuse (P = 0.013), and be enrolled into a higher level of clinical monitoring of opioid medication use (P = 0.008). No other associations with demographic and clinical variables reached statistical significance. Conclusions: Concurrent use of cannabis and opioids by patients with chronic pain appears to indicate higher risk for opioid misuse. Closer monitoring for opioid-related aberrancy is indicated for this group of patients.

Root cause analysis of prescription opioid overdoses.

Overdoses (ODs) of prescription opioids (RxOs) have become a major public health issue in the United States. OBJECTIVE: To determine the root causes of accidental prescription opioid overdoses (RxO-OD). DESIGN/SETTING/PARTICIPANTS/INTERVENTION: The authors conducted a root cause analysis using the Antecedent Target-Measurement method, interviewing three types of key informants: survivors of RxO-ODs, family members, and clinical experts. RESULTS: Ten survivors, five family members, and three experts were interviewed. Proximal causes of RxO-ODs described by survivors and family members were recent RxO dose escalation (n = 9), polysubstance use (n = 5), and polypharmacy use (n = 3). Proximal causes were elicited by the following six antecedent causes: wanting to feel good/high (n = 9), perceived tolerance to RxO (n = 6), didn't know/believe it was dangerous (n = 5), wanting to reduce psychosocial pain (n = 5), wanting to reduce physical pain (n = 4), and wanting to avoid discomfort due to withdrawal symptoms (n = 4). RxOs involved in the OD were either prescribed by a doctor (n = 7), purchased from a dealer (n = 6), given/purchased from family/friends (n = 3), or stolen from family (n = 1). Psychosocial stressors (n = 9), chronic recurrent depression (n = 3), and chronic substance abuse/addiction (n = 4) were also distal and proximal causes of OD. Experts cited similar causes but added prescriberrelated causes (eg, inadequate training) and healthcare system and culture. CONCLUSIONS: Patients at risk for OD can be identified and ODs potentially prevented. Opportunities for intervention include routine screening of patients using RxOs for psychosocial distress and coping, flagging of high-risk patients, care pathways for high-risk patients, clinician and patient training on OD prevention, and developing abuse-deterrent formulations of RxOs.