Opioid Taper Practices Among Clinicians.

INTRODUCTION: Opioid dose tapers are used frequently when cross-titrating from one or more opioids to another or when discontinuing therapy. Currently, there is no universally accepted evidence-based standard of care for this procedure which can leave patients at risk for withdrawal symptoms, inadequate pain control, or elevated suicide risk. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to examine practices and rationale among clinicians, to determine if there is a difference among respondents in their comfort level, method and rationale for tapering opioids at various morphine milligram equivalents (MME) and to assess the need for the development of a standard of care. METHODS: Data were derived from an electronic survey developed using SurveyMonkey®. The survey was disseminated via e-mail listservs, social media, and professional organizations. Data were collected regarding profession, confidence tapering opioids at varying total MME, method and rationale for tapering, and pharmacologic management of withdrawal symptoms. Pearson's Chi squared and Fisher's exact tests were used to assess statistical significance of results. RESULTS: A total of 149 clinicians completed the survey, physicians, NPs, pharmacists, and PAs accounted for 51%, 20%, 19%, and 10% of participants, respectively. Overall, 55% of the respondents self-identified as pain specialists. There were no statistically significant differences in reported comfort level among the different types of providers. Nearly 50% of participants indicated their rationale for tapering or discontinuing opioids was the 2016 CDC guidelines. CONCLUSION: Despite that the majority of providers surveyed self-identified as pain specialists, over 50% were not comfortable tapering opioids at doses greater than 120 MME/day. This observation suggests a need for further education and establishment of consensus guidelines on method and rationale for opioid tapering. Provider motivation for tapering was largely influenced by CDC guidelines based on low quality evidence. This strengthens the argument for the creation of guidelines based on high quality evidence.

Gaps in the Use of Long-Acting Opioids Within Intervals of Consecutive Days Among Cancer Outpatients Using Electronic Pill Caps.

OBJECTIVE: This study describes individual cancer patients' nonuse of extended-release or long-acting (ER/LA) opioids, including periods of gap between opioid doses taken. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of a three-month observational study of prescribed ER/LA opioids monitored using electronic pill caps. SETTING: Two outpatient oncology clinics of a large health system in the Mid-Atlantic region. PARTICIPANTS: Inclusion was based on self-identified African Americans and whites, at least 18 years old, diagnosed with solid tumors or multiple myeloma. For the current analysis, the additional inclusion criterion was prescription of an oral ER/LA opioid for cancer pain to be taken around the clock. METHODS: The electronic monitoring period for each study participant was partitioned into intervals of days between days with one or more openings (using medication event monitoring systems) representing rates of ER/LA opioid nonuse over consecutive days and over time. RESULTS: Of the sample (N = 109), two-thirds of the cancer patients had some nonuse of prescribed ER/LA opioids, with one in four having nonuse during 31.5-87.5% of their electronic-monitoring periods. Nonuse over periods of five or more, six or more, and seven or more consecutive days occurred for 37.6%, 34.9%, and 30.3% of the participants, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: About one in three ambulatory cancer patients in this study had substantial gaps between days of ER/LA opioid use, potentially resulting in risk of overdose depending upon the prescribed ER/LA opioid type, dose, and length of the time the opioid was stopped and resumed at the previous dose. This phenomenon has received little to no attention in the opioid safety discourse.

Students' Perspectives on Nebulized Drugs and Nebulizer Maintenance.

The geriatric population experiences a variety of respiratory concerns including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, emphysema, asthma, pulmonary hypertension, and lower respiratory infections. Treating these illnesses often requires the use of inhaled therapies that can be delivered through multiple modalities, each of which carries its own pros and cons unique to its use in the geriatric population. Pharmacists have an opportunity to play a role in optimizing the selection of delivery devices and in providing patient and provider education on appropriate use of inhaled therapies. Through patient counseling and correct device selection, patient outcomes can be improved. This paper explores the differences among devices, provides specific information regarding drug mixing for nebulization, provides information regarding cleaning/maintenance of nebulizers, and addresses specific concerns related to geriatric care. It can serve as a reference for pharmacists and student pharmacists as they educate patients and providers.