Relationships between physical therapy intervention and opioid use: A scoping review.

OBJECTIVE: To synthesize available evidence that has examined the relationship between physical therapy (PT) and opioid use. TYPE: Scoping Review LITERATURE SURVEY: Data sources including Google Scholar, Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and CINAHL were searched for English articles up to October 24, 2019 using terms ("physical therapy"[Title/Abstract] OR physiotherapy[Title/Abstract] OR rehabilitation[Title/Abstract]) AND (opiate*[Title/Abstract] OR opioid*[Title/Abstract]). METHODOLOGY: Included studies evaluated a PT intervention and reported an opioid-use outcome. Data were extracted to describe the PT intervention, patient sample, opioid-use measurement, and results of any time or group comparisons. Study quality was evaluated with Joanna Briggs checklists based on study design. SYNTHESIS: Thirty studies were included that evaluated PT in at least one of these seven categories: interdisciplinary program (n = 8), modalities (n = 3), treatment (n = 3), utilization (n = 2), content (n = 3), timing (n = 13), and location (n = 2). Mixed results were reported for reduced opioid-use after interdisciplinary care and after PT modalities. Utilizing PT was associated with lower odds (ranging from 0.2-0.8) of using opioid medication for persons with low back pain (LBP) and injured workers; however, guideline-adherent care did not further reduce opioid use for persons with LBP. Early PT utilization after index visit for spine or joint pain and after orthopedic surgery was also associated with lower odds of using opioid medications (ranging from 0.27-0.93). Emergency department PT care was not associated with fewer opioid prescriptions than standard emergency department care. PT in a rehabilitation center after total knee replacement was not associated with lower opioid use than inpatient PT. CONCLUSIONS: The relationship between timing of PT and opioid use was evaluated in 13 of 30 studies for a variety of patient populations. Eight of these 13 studies reported a relationship between early PT and reduced subsequent opioid use, making the largest sample of studies in this scoping review with supporting evidence. There is limited and inconclusive evidence to establish whether the content and/or location of PT interventions improves outcomes because of heterogeneity between studies.

Harms and benefits of opioids for management of non-surgical acute and chronic low back pain: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Consequences of prescription opioid use involve harms, addiction, tolerance and death. Despite routine prescription, opioids are not recommended for initial intervention by any major multidisciplinary low back pain (LBP) guideline. OBJECTIVE: Our primary purpose was to improve overall understanding of the harms and benefits associated with oral opioid interventions prescribed for treatment of acute or chronic back pain. Our second goal was to evaluate pain intensity and to compare and contrast these data with the harms. Our last objective was to evaluate conflicts of interest among the study authors and the findings. DESIGN/DATA/ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies incorporating oral prescription opioid management of non-surgical LBP were evaluated. After systematic assessment, no studies that met inclusion included participants with specifically acute LBP. Therefore, extracted data reflects only populations with subacute and chronic LBP. Data on reported harms, severe harms, pain outcomes and withdrawal rates were extracted and meta-analyses were completed for opioid versus placebo trials and opioids versus non-opioid trials. RESULTS: Fourteen studies met inclusion/exclusion requirements. All trials involved short-term management with limited follow-up. A high percentage of harms were identified across most studies. Opioids were not shown to be superior to other medications, and only showed superiority to placebo comparators (at cost of additional harms). CONCLUSION: This review identified trends of higher harms rates and higher percentages of severe harms in opioid arms for the management of subacute and chronic LBP. The majority of trials that demonstrated benefits with opioids also had potential conflicts of interest. Lastly, non-opioid medications demonstrated statistically significant pain improvement compared with opioids. We feel that the results of the trial are supportive of current LBP guidelines and do not condone the initial use of opioids in management of subacute or chronic LBP. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017070914.