Exercise as a Treatment for Chronic Pain

Many states have adopted laws that limit the amount or duration of opioid prescriptions. These limits often focus on prescriptions for acute pain, but there may be unintended consequences for those diagnosed with chronic pain, including reduced opioid prescribing without substitution of appropriate non-opioid treatments. To evaluate the effects of state opioid prescribing cap laws on opioid and non-opioid treatment among those diagnosed with chronic pain. We used a difference-in-differences approach that accounts for staggered policy adoption. Treated states included 32 states that implemented a prescribing cap law between 2017 and 2019. A total of 480,856 adults in the USA who were continuously enrolled in medical and pharmacy coverage from 2013 to 2019 and diagnosed with a chronic pain condition between 2013 and 2016. Among individuals with chronic pain in each state: proportion with at least one opioid prescription and with prescriptions of a specific duration or dose, average number of opioid prescriptions, average opioid prescription duration and dose, proportion with at least one non-opioid chronic pain prescription, average number of such prescriptions, proportion with at least one chronic pain procedure, and average number of such procedures. State laws limiting opioid prescriptions were not associated with changes in opioid prescribing, non-opioid medication prescribing, or non-opioid chronic pain procedures among patients with chronic pain diagnoses. These findings do not support an association between state opioid prescribing cap laws and changes in the treatment of chronic non-cancer pain.

Opioids for the treatment of acute pain and the pain of malignancy have been strongly encouraged for more than 25 years.1 In the past 2 decades, the treatment of chronic noncancer pain using long-term opioid therapy has become more common. However, recent studies have revealed the astonishing rapidi

Issues in Long-term Opioid Therapy: Unmet Needs, Risks, and Solutions

HT9For this discussion, we were honored to hold this timely conversation with two renowned individuals who understand the opioid epidemic well.

Objective The aims of the present study were to describe the use, and barriers to the use, of non-medication pain therapies and to identify the demographic and clinical correlates of different non-opioid pain treatments. Methods The study was performed on a cohort (n=1514) of people prescribed pharmaceutical opioids for chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP). Participants reported lifetime and past month use of healthcare services, mental and physical health, pain characteristics, current oral morphine equivalent daily doses and financial and access barriers to healthcare services. Results Participants reported the use of non-opioid pain treatments, both before and after commencing opioid therapy. Services accessed most in the past month were complementary and alternative medicines (CAMs; 41%), physiotherapy (16%) and medical and/or pain specialists (15%). Higher opioid dose was associated with increased financial and access barriers to non-opioid treatment. Multivariate analyses indicated being younger, female and having private health insurance were the factors most commonly associated with accessing non-opioid treatments. Conclusions Patients on long-term opioid therapy report using multiple types of pain treatments. High rates of CAM use are concerning given limited evidence of efficacy for some therapies and the low-income status of most people with CNCP. Financial and insurance barriers highlight the importance of considering how different types of treatments are paid for and subsidised. What is known about the topic? Given concerns regarding long-term efficacy, adverse side-effects and risk of misuse and dependence, prescribing guidelines recommend caution in prescribing pharmaceutical opioids in cases of CNCP, typically advising a multidisciplinary approach to treatment. There is a range of evidence supporting different (non-drug) treatment approaches for CNCP to reduce pain severity and increase functioning. However, little is known about the non-opioid treatments used among those with CNCP and the demographic and clinical characteristics that may be associated with the use of different types of treatments. Understanding the use of non-drug therapy among people with CNCP is crucial given the potential to improve pain control for these patients. What does this paper add? The present study found that a wide range of non-opioid treatments was accessed by the study sample, both before and after commencing opioids, indicating that in this sample opioids were not the sole strategy used for pain management. The most common treatment (other than opioids) was CAM, reported by two-fifths of the sample. Having private health insurance was associated with increased use of non-opioid treatments for pain, highlighting the importance of considering how treatments are paid for and potential financial barriers to effective treatments. What are the implications for practitioners? Patients' beliefs and financial barriers may affect the uptake of different treatments. Many patients may be using complementary and alternative approaches with limited evidence to support their use, highlighting the need for clinicians to discuss with patients the range of prescribed and non-prescribed treatments they are accessing and to help them understand the benefits and risks of treatments that have not been tested sufficiently, or have inconsistent evidence, as to their efficacy in improving pain outcomes.

Risky substance use (RSU) is common among people with chronic pain and is associated with worse pain treatment outcomes. Nonopioid treatment is recommended, but it is unknown whether people with RSU use different or fewer pain treatment modalities. This study describes use of different pain treatments by veterans with and without RSU and those receiving versus not receiving opioid medication. Veterans (N = 924) who filed service-connected disability claims related to musculoskeletal conditions and rated their pain four or higher on the Numeric Rating Scale, reported on 25 different pain services in the preceding 90 days. Recent RSU was identified via Alcohol, Smoking, and Substance Involvement Test (ASSIST) cutoffs and/or nail sample toxicology. Overall, RSU was not associated with number of provider-delivered or self-delivered pain modalities. Over-the-counter medications (71%), self-structured exercise (69%), and nonopioid prescription medications (38%) were the most used modalities. Veterans receiving prescribed opioids (8.4%) were more likely to see primary care, receive injections, and attend exercise and/or meditation classes, compared to those without opioid prescriptions. Opioid and nonopioid pain treatment utilization did not differ based on RSU, and those prescribed opioids were more likely to engage in other nonopioid pain treatments. Regardless of RSU, veterans appear willing to try provider-delivered (58%) and self-delivered (79%) pain treatment. In this first-ever evaluation of 25 different pain treatment modalities among veterans with and without RSU, people with RSU did not use less treatment modalities.

Problem: Worldwide, at least one in four adults do not exercise sufficiently. Inactivity is associated with an increase in disease burden and mortality, whereas exercise can contribute to a longer, healthier life. Chronic musculoskeletal pain is a significant public health concern; in Germany, approximately 15% of the adult population suffers from chronic low back pain. Based on the diagnoses of chronic back pain, chronic joint pain, and chronic widespread pain or fibromyalgia syndrome, this study will evaluate the importance of exercise in the treatment of chronic pain. Methods: Narrative review based on current treatment guidelines and scientific publications. Results: Exercise and physical activity are both preventively and therapeutically effective in the treatment of chronic musculoskeletal pain. Individualized, supervised exercise programs that take patients’ preferences and goals into account appear to be particularly effective, regardless of pain location. There is evidence that the positive biopsychosocial effects of movement are more important than the specific form of exercise. Discussion: In the treatment of chronic pain, exercise and activity should be considered primary therapeutic measures and be prescribed accordingly. Supervision and adaptation of exercise programs to patient needs are critical factors of success, regardless of the type of sport or form of exercise. Even a small dose of physical activity achieves health benefits in patients with chronic pain and contributes to symptom relief.

Depression is associated with receipt of opioids in non-cancer pain. To determine whether the receipt of opioid therapy modifies the relationship of depression and use of multiple non-opioid pain treatments. Patients (n = 320) with chronic low back pain (CLBP) were recruited from family medicine clinics and completed questionnaires that measured use of home remedies, physical treatments requiring a provider and non-opioid medication treatments. A binary variable defined use (yes/no) of all three non-opioid treatment categories. Depression (yes/no) was measured with the PHQ-2. The use of opioids (yes/no) was determined by medical record abstraction. Unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression models, stratified on opioid use, estimated the association between depression and use of all three non-opioid treatments. Participants were mostly female (71.3%), non-white (57.5%) and 69.4% were aged 18 to 59 years. In adjusted analyses stratified by opioid use, depression was not significantly associated with using three non-opioid treatments (OR = 2.20; 95% CI = 0.80-6.07) among non-opioid users; but among opioid users, depression was significantly associated with using three non-opioid treatments (OR = 3.21; 95% CI: 1.14-8.99). These odds ratios were not significantly different between opioid users and non-users (P = 0.609). There is modest evidence to conclude that patients with CLBP and comorbid depression, compared with those without depression, were more likely to try both opioid and non-opioid pain treatments. Non-response to other pain treatments may partly explain why depression is associated with greater prescription opioid use.

Pain Management Still a Pain

We had high or moderate confidence in the evidence contributing to most review findings. Further research, especially into families' experiences of treatments and services, could strengthen the evidence for low or very low confidence findings. Future research should also explore families' experiences in low- to middle-income contexts; of pain treatments including opioid use in children, which remains controversial; and of social care services. We need development and testing of family-centred interventions and services acceptable to families. Future trials of children's chronic non-cancer pain interventions should include family-centred outcomes.

Exploring the prevalence and construct validity of high-impact chronic pain across chronic low-back pain study samples

Recent clinical guidelines have emphasized non-opioid treatments in lieu of prescription opioids for chronic non-cancer pain, exempting cancer patients from these recommendations. In this study, we determine trends in opioid and non-opioid treatment among privately insured adults with chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) or cancer. Using administrative claims data from IBM MarketScan Research Databases, we identified privately-insured adults who were continuously enrolled in insurance for at least one calendar year from 2012 to 2019. We identified individuals with CNCP diagnosis, defined as a diagnosis of arthritis, headache, low back pain, and/or neuropathic pain, and a individuals with cancer diagnosis in a calendar year. Outcomes included receipt of any opioid, non-opioid medication, or non-pharmacologic CNCP therapy and opioid prescribing volume, MME-per-day, and days’ supply. Estimates were regression-adjusted for age, sex, and region. Between 2012 and 2019, the proportion of patients who received any opioid decreased across both groups (CNCP: 49.7 to 30.5%, p<0.01; cancer: 86.0 to 78.7%, p<0.01). Non-opioid pain medication receipt remained steady for individuals with CNCP (66.7 to 66.4%, p<0.01) and increased for individuals with cancer (74.4 to 78.8%, p<0.01), while non-pharmacologic therapy use rose among individuals with CNCP (62.4 to 66.1%, p<0.01). Among those prescribed opioids, there was a decrease in the receipt of at least one prescription with >90 MME/day (CNCP: 13.9% in 2012 to 4.9% in 2019, p<0.01; Cancer: 26.2% to 7.6%, p<0.01); >7 days of supply (CNCP: 56.3% to 30.7%, p <0.01; Cancer: 47.5% to 22.7%, p<0.01), the mean number of opioid prescriptions (CNCP: 5.2 to 3.9, p<0.01; Cancer: 4.0 to 2.7, p<0.01) and mean MME/day (CNCP: 49.9 to 38.0, p<0.01; Cancer: 62.4 to 44.7, p<0.01). Overall, from 2012–2019, opioid prescribing declined for CNCP and cancer, with larger reductions for patients with CNCP. For both groups, reductions in prescribed opioids outpaced increases in non-opioid alternatives.

A descriptive analysis of secondary data. The aim of this study was to estimate health care costs and opioid use for those with high-impact chronic spinal (back and neck) pain. The US National Pain Strategy introduced a focus on high-impact chronic pain-that is, chronic pain associated with work, social, and self-care restrictions. Chronic neck and low-back pain are common, costly, and associated with long-term opioid use. Although chronic pain is not homogenous, most estimates of its costs are averages that ignore severity (impact). We used 2003 to 2015 Medical Expenditures Panel Survey (MEPS) data to identify individuals with chronic spinal pain, their health care expenditures, and use of opioids. We developed prediction models to identify those with high- versus moderate- and low-impact chronic spinal pain based on the variables available in MEPS. We found that overall and spine-related health care costs, and the use and dosage of opioids increased significantly with chronic pain impact levels. Overall and spine-related annual per person health care costs for those with high-impact chronic pain ($14,661 SE: $814; and $5979 SE: $471, respectively) were more than double that of those with low-impact, but still clinically significant, chronic pain ($6371 SE: $557; and $2300 SE: $328). Those with high-impact chronic spinal pain also use spine-related opioids at a rate almost four times that of those with low-impact pain (48.4% vs. 12.4%), and on average use over five times the morphine equivalent daily dose (MEDD) in mg (15.3 SE: 1.4 vs. 2.7 SE: 0.6). Opioid use and dosing increased significantly across years, but the increase in inflation-adjusted health care costs was not statistically significant. Although most studies of chronic spinal pain do not differentiate participants by the impact of their chronic pain, these estimates highlight the importance of identifying chronic pain levels and focusing on those with high-impact chronic pain. 3.

Exploring the Multiple Roles of Acupuncture in Alleviating the Opioid Crisis.

Chronic pain and narcotics: a dilemma for primary care.