Management Of Chronic Non-cancer Pain Research Articles

Drug consumption stigma and patient legitimacy: experiences of people who use drugs seeking care for chronic non-cancer pain in Nigeria

ABSTRACT This study explored how people who use drugs (PWUD) experience and respond to stigma in biomedical chronic non-cancer pain management. Thematic analysis of in-depth interviews with PWUD (n = 26) who had sought care for chronic non-cancer pain in public hospitals in Uyo, Nigeria, drew on the idea of stigma as process of social reproduction and the concept of borderwork. Accounts framed stigma as a normalised feature of healthcare that emerged under different circumstances and operated to position chronic non-cancer pain patients who were PWUD as illegitimate subjects underserving of care. Stigma was widely seen as something to be expected, and was often tolerated by PWUD due to its ubiquity. However, they enacted borderwork marking-off stigma experiences that violated values of fairness and humaneness as well as those that spurned traditional gender norms. Participants responded to intolerable stigma through various acts of resistance, including dropping out of care. Stigma creates barriers to adequate pain management and establishes a context where basic care is accessed at the cost of fundamental human rights and dignity. Routine toleration of stigma helps to naturalise the phenomenon and render it invisible. Resistance to stigma provides a basis for interventions to address all forms of stigma in healthcare.

Evolution of Fentanyl Prescription Patterns and Administration Routes in Primary Care in Salamanca, Spain: A Comprehensive Analysis from 2011 to 2022.

(1) Background: The escalating use of opioids contributes to social, health, and economic crises. In Spain, a notable surge in the medical prescription of opioids in recent years has been observed. The aim of this work was to assess the consumption rate of fentanyl, categorised by the different administration routes, in Primary Care in the province of Salamanca (Spain) spanning the years 2011 to 2022, and to compare it with the national trend and with data from the US. (2) Methods: Doses per inhabitant per day (DHD) were calculated, and interannual variations, as well as consumption rates, were subject to thorough analysis. (3) Results: The prevalence of fentanyl use in Salamanca has doubled from 1.21 DHD in 2011 to 2.56 DHD in 2022, with the transdermal system (TD) as the predominant administration route. This upward trajectory mirrors the national trend, yet the rise in fentanyl use is markedly lower than the reported data in the US. This finding may be attributed to an ageing population and potentially inappropriate fentanyl prescriptions, i.e., for the management of chronic non-cancer pain and other off-label prescriptions. (4) Conclusions: The use of fentanyl in Salamanca, particularly through transdermal systems, doubled from 2011 to 2022, aligning with the national trend. Preventive measures are imperative to prevent fentanyl misuse and moderate the observed escalation in consumption rates.

EHealth-Integrated Psychosocial and Physical Interventions for Chronic Pain in Older Adults: Scoping Review.

Chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) is highly present among older adults, affecting their physical, psychological, and social functioning. A biopsychosocial multimodal approach to CNCP management is currently extensively suggested by international clinical practice guidelines. Recently, the growing development and application of eHealth within pain management has yielded encouraging results in terms of effectiveness and feasibility; however, its use among the older population remains underexamined. The overall aim of this scoping review was to systematically map existing literature about eHealth multimodal interventions (including both physical and psychosocial components) targeting older adults with CNCP. This review adhered to the JBI methodology, a protocol was a priori registered as a preprint on the medRxiv platform, and the results were reported according to the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines. Four electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and PsycINFO) were systematically searched for relevant articles. Studies were included if they reported on multimodal interventions (including both physical and psychosocial components) delivered through any eHealth modality to an older population with any type of CNCP. Two reviewers selected the studies: first by screening titles and abstracts and second by screening full-text articles. The quality of the included studies was evaluated using the Quality Assessment Tool for Studies with Diverse Designs. The results of the studies were summarized narratively. A total of 9 studies (n=6, 67% published between 2021 and 2023) with quality rated as medium to high were included, of which 7 (78%) were randomized controlled trials (n=5, 71% were pilot and feasibility studies). All the included studies evaluated self-management interventions, most of them (n=7, 78%) specifically designed for older adults. The participants were aged between 65 and 75 years on average (mean 68.5, SD 3.5 y) and had been diagnosed with different types of CNCP (eg, osteoarthritis and chronic low back pain). Most of the included studies (5/9, 56%) involved the use of multiple eHealth modalities, with a higher use of web-based programs and video consulting. Only 1 (11%) of the 9 studies involved a virtual reality-based intervention. The evaluated interventions showed signs of effectiveness in the targeted biopsychosocial outcomes, and the participants' engagement and ratings of satisfaction were generally positive. However, several research gaps were identified and discussed. Overall, of late, there has been a growing interest in the potential that eHealth multimodal interventions offer in terms of improving pain, physical, and psychosocial outcomes in older adults with CNCP. However, existing literature on this topic still seems scarce and highly heterogeneous, with few proper randomized controlled trials, precluding robust conclusions. Several gaps emerged in terms of the older population considered and the lack of evaluation of comorbidities. RR2-10.1101/2023.07.27.23293235.

Use of CYP2D6 substrates and inhibitors during pain management with analgesic opioids: Drug-drug interactions that lead to lack of analgesic effectiveness

BackgroundSeveral opioids have pharmacogenetic and drug-drug interactions which may compromise their analgesic effectiveness, but are not routinely implemented into supportive pain management. We hypothesized that CYP2D6 phenotypes and concomitant use of CYP2D6 substrates or inhibitors would correlate with opioid analgesic outcomes. Materials and MethodsAn observational cross-sectional study was conducted with 263 adult chronic non cancer pain (CNCP) patients from a real-world pain unit under long-term CYP2D6-related opioid treatment (tramadol, hydromorphone, tapentadol or oxycodone). Metabolizer phenotype (ultrarapid [UM], normal [NM], intermediate [IM] or poor [PM]) was determined by the CYP2D6 genotype. The socio-demographic (sex, age, employment status), clinical (pain intensity and relief, neuropathic component, quality of life, disability, anxiety and depression), pharmacological (opioid doses and concomitant pharmacotherapy) and safety (adverse events) variables were recorded. ResultsThe whole population (66 % female, 65 (14) years old, 70 % retired and 63 % attended for low back pain) were classified as PM (5 %), IM (32 %), NM (56 %) and UM (6 %). Multiple linear and logistic regressions showed higher pain intensity and neuropathic component at younger ages when using any CYP2D6 substrate (p = 0.022) or inhibitor (p = 0.030) drug, respectively, with poorer pain relief when CYP2D6 inhibitors (p=0.030) were present. ConclusionThe concomitant use of CYP2D6 substrates or inhibitors during opioid therapy for CNCP may result in lack of analgesic effectiveness. This aspect could be relevant for pharmacological decision making during CNCP management.

Nabilone for Chronic Non-Cancer Pain

What Is the Issue? Chronic pain is pain that lasts beyond 3 months. Chronic non-cancer pain conditions include osteoarthritis, low back pain, musculoskeletal pain, fibromyalgia, and neuropathic pain. Approximately 1 in 5 people in Canada live with chronic pain. Nabilone (a cannabinoid) is indicated for the management of severe nausea and vomiting associated with cancer chemotherapy. Nabilone is also used in the management of chronic non-cancer pain. It is important to understand the potential benefits and harms of nabilone in people living with chronic non-cancer pain to support decision-making. What Did We Do? We sought to identify, summarize, and critically appraise literature comparing the clinical effectiveness of nabilone and placebo or alternative pharmacological options. We also searched for evidence-based guidelines that provide recommendations about the use of nabilone for the treatment of chronic non-cancer pain. We searched key resources, including journal citation databases, and conducted a focused internet search for relevant evidence published since 2015. One reviewer screened articles for inclusion based on predefined criteria, critically appraised the included studies, and narratively summarized the findings. What Did We Find? We found 1 overview of reviews and 2 systematic reviews that assessed the clinical efficacy and safety of nabilone for the treatment of chronic non-cancer pain. The evidence on the clinical efficacy of nabilone was mixed with some studies reporting an improvement in pain in those treated with nabilone versus placebo or active comparators and other studies reporting no difference between groups. Adverse events were more common in people living with chronic non-cancer pain who received nabilone than those who received placebo, ibuprofen, or amitriptyline. Adverse events were more common in those who received dihydrocodeine or gabapentin than nabilone. It is uncertain if nabilone is an effective treatment for people living with chronic non-cancer pain due to the varied results and methodological limitations of the included studies. We found 1 guideline that included a recommendation specific to nabilone and 2 guidelines that included recommendations on the use of cannabinoids in general. One guideline recommends against the use of nabilone for chronic pain, 1 guideline recommends offering a trial of non-inhaled cannabinoids (such as nabilone) for people living with chronic pain, and 1 guideline suggests cannabinoids be avoided in people with osteoarthritis and low back pain and discussed with people with neuropathic pain. What Does This Mean? Due to the uncertainty of the clinical evidence, decision-makers may wish to consider other factors such as costs, equity, and patient values and preferences when making decisions on the use of nabilone for people living with chronic non-cancer pain. Future high-quality, longer-term (e.g., RCT with follow-up studies) studies are needed to understand the efficacy and safety of nabilone for the treatment of people living with chronic non-cancer pain.

Clinical prediction of opioid use disorder in chronic pain patients: a cohort-retrospective study with a pharmacogenetic approach.

Opioids are widely used in chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) management. However, they remain controversial due to serious risk of causing opioid use disorder (OUD). Our main aim was to develop a predictive model for future clinical translation that include pharmacogenetic markers. An observational study was conducted in 806 pre-screened Spanish CNCP patients, under long-term use of opioids, to compare cases (with OUD, N.=137) with controls (without OUD, N.=669). Mu-opioid receptor 1 (OPRM1, A118G, rs1799971) and catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT, G472A, rs4680) genetic variants plus cytochrome P450 2D6 (CYP2D6) liver enzyme phenotypes were analyzed. Socio-demographic, clinical and pharmacological outcomes were also registered. A logistic regression model was performed. The model performance and diagnostic accuracy were calculated. OPRM1-AA genotype and CYP2D6 poor and ultrarapid metabolizers together with three other potential predictors: 1) age; 2) work disability; 3) oral morphine equivalent daily dose (MEDD), were selected with a satisfactory diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity: 0.82 and specificity: 0.85), goodness of fit (P=0.87) and discrimination (0.89). Cases were ten-year younger with lower incomes, more sleep disturbances, benzodiazepines use, and history of substance use disorder in front of controls. Functional polymorphisms related to OPRM1 variant and CYP2D6 phenotypes may predict a higher OUD risk. Established risk factors such as young age, elevated MEDD and lower incomes were identified. A predictive model is expected to be implemented in clinical setting among CNCP patients under long-term opioids use.

Patients' perspectives about the role of primary healthcare providers in long-term opioid therapy: a qualitative study in Dutch primary care.

Over the past decade, long-term use of prescription opioids for chronic non-cancer pain has risen globally despite the associated risks. Most opioid users receive their first prescription in primary care. To investigate the perspective of patients who are long-term opioid users in primary care regarding the role of healthcare providers (HCPs) in their prolonged opioid use. Semi-structured interviews in Dutch primary care. We recruited patients who were long-term users of opioids for chronic non-cancer pain from seven community pharmacies in the Netherlands. In-depth, semi-structured interviews focused on patients' experiences with long-term opioid use, access to opioids, and the guidance of their HCPs (primarily their GPs and pharmacists). A directed content analysis was conducted on the transcribed interviews using NVivo. Participants (n = 25) described ways in which HCPs impacted their long-term use of opioids. These encompassed the initiation of treatment, chronic use of opioids, and discontinuation of treatment. Participants stressed the need for risk counselling during initial prescribing, ongoing medication evaluations including tapering conversations, and more support from their HCP during a tapering attempt. Patients' perspectives illustrate the important role of HCPs across the spectrum of opioid use - from initiation to tapering. The results of this study underscore the importance of clear risk counselling starting at initial prescribing, repeated medication assessments throughout treatment, addressing tapering at regular intervals, and strong support during tapering. These insights carry significant implications for clinical practice, emphasising the importance of informed and patient-centred care when it comes to opioid use for chronic non-cancer pain management.

Management of chronic non-cancer pain by primary care physicians: A qualitative study.

Chronic non-cancer pain is a highly prevalent health issue with personal and societal consequences. Patients suffering from chronic non-cancer pain are mainly cared for by primary care physicians, but research shows that the latter perceive treating chronic pain as difficult. This qualitative descriptive study aimed to explore how primary care physicians in Switzerland manage patients with chronic non-cancer pain and what factors influence patient management. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews amongst primary care physicians in the German speaking part of Switzerland. A thematic analysis of the interviews allowed to identify four main themes: Investigation of chronic pain; patient-provider relationship; patient characteristics, and medical recommendations. These themes were closely interconnected and influenced each other. Physicians not only enquired about the origin of pain but also about the patients' beliefs and expectations towards it. They stressed the role of communication in fostering a good patient-physician relationship and to help patients cope with their pain. In addition to purely medical considerations, the psychological, social and economic situation of their patients and their possible impacts on the management of chronic non-cancer pain played a crucial role when recommending a treatment. This study highlighted the complexity of chronic pain management, which entails that primary care physicians need to figure out a unique strategy for each patient. By integrating patients' values and beliefs, as well as socioeconomic aspects, primary care physicians are in a position to take the lead in chronic non-cancer pain management. However, considering the burden of this disease, more continuous medical education on chronic pain is needed for primary care physicians, especially to better take into account the social determinants of pain.

The Effect of Family Nursing Conversations as an Add-on to Multidisciplinary Treatment in Patients with Chronic Non-Cancer Pain: A Quasi-Experimental Trial.

Chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) is a lifelong condition with radical consequences, calling for management involving patients' families. Interventions based on the family systems nursing framework by Wright and Leahey have proved beneficial in other populations but require investigation in a CNCP population. This trial assumed that family nursing conversations (FNCs) based on the family systems nursing framework would increase patients' and family members' self-efficacy concerning CNCP management. To investigate whether an intervention with FNCs as an add-on to the usual multidisciplinary treatment of CNCP would have an effect on patients' and family members' self-efficacy. Additionally, to investigate any impact on family function, health-related quality of life, anxiety, and depression. The trial applied a prospective non-blinded quasi-experimental design with two comparable groups of patients and family members: a historical control group (HCG) and an intervention group (IG). The intervention was executed by nurses employed at a multidisciplinary pain center in the Capital Region of Denmark. HCG data were collected before the nurses' intervention training. The primary outcome was self-efficacy. Secondary outcomes were family function, health-related quality of life, anxiety, and depression. In total, 58 patients and 85 family members were included. The primary outcome, self-efficacy, detected no statistically significant between-group differences in mean change for patients, p = .990, or family members, p = .765. A statistically significant effect in favor of the IG was found in between-group differences in mean change in patients' behavioral family function, p = .034, and anxiety, p = .031. No statistically significant between-group differences were detected in family members' secondary outcomes. The intervention had no effect on patients' or family members' self-efficacy but a positive effect on patients' behavioral family function and anxiety. The intervention was deeply affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Hence, any results should be interpreted with caution.

Opioid and the usage in chronic non cancer pain

The use of opioid in various guidelines for chronic non-cancer pain is controversial because evidence of their long-term benefits is weak. The potential for serious adverse effects and local regulations warrant caution in both prescribers and users. However, opioids have a role in the management of chronic non-cancer pain in carefully selected patients with regular monitoring and as a part of multimodal therapy. Common adverse effects should be treated promptly to improve patient compliance. We believe that opioid therapy at low doses is beneficial in some patients. It should not be denied but carefully considered on a case-by-case basis.

Comprehensive, Evidence-Based, Consensus Guidelines for Prescription of Opioids for Chronic Non-Cancer Pain from the American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP)

BACKGROUND: Opioid prescribing in the United States is decreasing, however, the opioid epidemic is continuing at an uncontrollable rate. Available data show a significant number of opioid deaths, primarily associated with illicit fentanyl use. It is interesting to also note that the data show no clear correlation between opioid prescribing (either number of prescriptions or morphine milligram equivalent [MME] per capita), opioid hospitalizations, and deaths. Furthermore, the data suggest that the 2016 guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have resulted in notable problems including increased hospitalizations and mental health disorders due to the lack of appropriate opioid prescribing as well as inaptly rapid tapering or weaning processes. Consequently, when examined in light of other policies and complications caused by COVID-19, a fourth wave of the opioid epidemic has been emerging. OBJECTIVES: In light of this, we herein seek to provide guidance for the prescription of opioids for the management of chronic non-cancer pain. These clinical practice guidelines are based upon a systematic review of both clinical and epidemiological evidence and have been developed by a panel of multidisciplinary experts assessing the quality of the evidence and the strength of recommendations and offer a clear explanation of logical relationships between various care options and health outcomes. METHODS: The methods utilized included the development of objectives and key questions for the various facets of opioid prescribing practice. Also utilized were employment of trustworthy standards, and appropriate disclosures of conflicts of interest(s). The literature pertaining to opioid use, abuse, effectiveness, and adverse consequences was reviewed. The recommendations were developed after the appropriate review of text and questions by a panel of multidisciplinary subject matter experts, who tabulated comments, incorporated changes, and developed focal responses to questions posed. The multidisciplinary panel finalized 20 guideline recommendations for prescription of opioids for chronic non-cancer pain. Summary of the results showed over 90% agreement for the final 20 recommendations with strong consensus. The consensus guidelines included 4 sections specific to opioid therapy with 1) ten recommendations particular to initial steps of opioid therapy; 2) five recommendations for assessment of effectiveness of opioid therapy; 3) three recommendations regarding monitoring adherence and side effects; and 4) two general, final phase recommendations. LIMITATIONS: There is a continued paucity of literature of long-term opioid therapy addressing chronic non-cancer pain. Further, significant biases exist in the preparation of guidelines, which has led to highly variable rules and regulations across various states. CONCLUSION: These guidelines were developed based upon a comprehensive review of the literature, consensus among expert panelists, and in alignment with patient preferences, and shared decision-making so as to improve the long-term pain relief and function in patients with chronic non-cancer pain. Consequently, it was concluded – and herein recommended – that chronic opioid therapy should be provided in low doses with appropriate adherence monitoring and understanding of adverse events only to those patients with a proven medical necessity, and who exhibit stable improvement in both pain relief and activities of daily function, either independently or in conjunction with other modalities of treatments. KEY WORDS: Chronic pain, persistent pain, non-cancer pain, controlled substances, substance abuse, prescription drug abuse, dependency, opioids, prescription monitoring, drug testing, adherence monitoring, diversion DISCLAIMER: The guidelines presented are based upon the best available evidence, and do not constitute or represent inflexible treatment recommendations. This document is not intended to be regarded and/or used as a “standard of care.”

Shifting quality chronic pain treatment measures from processes to outcomes.

Misapplication of the 2016 Centers for Disease Control (CDC) opioid prescribing guidelines has led to overem-phasis of morphineequivalent daily dose (MEDD) as a "metric of success" in chronic noncancer pain (CNCP), resulting in unintentional harms to patients. This article reviews CNCP-related guidelines and patient preferences in order to identify pragmatic, patient-centered metrics to assess treatment response and safety in opioid-treated CNCP. We reviewed the clinical (CDC), research (Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials), and implementability-related guidelines (GuideLine Implementability Appraisal), along with relevant patient-identified treatment goals. From these, we summarize a guideline-concordant, patient-centered, implementable set of measures to aid the clinical management of opioid-treated CNCP. We identify metrics across three domains of care: (1) treatment response metrics, which align with the CNCP care goals (pain intensity, pain interference including function and quality of life, and global impression of change); (2) risk assessment ("safety") metrics, eg, MEDD, benzodiazepine-opioid or naloxone-opioid coprescribing, and severity of mental health disorders, which evaluate the risk-benefit profile of opioid therapy; and (3) adherence ("process") metrics, which assess clinician/patient adherence to the guideline-recommended opioid therapy monitoring practices, eg, the presence of completed treatment agreement or urine toxicology testing. All metrics should be informed by implementability principles, eg, be decidable, executable, and measurable. This article summarizes guideline-concordant, patient-centered, implementable metrics for assessing treatment response, safety, and adherence in opioid-treated CNCP. Regardless of which specific treatment guidelines are applied, this approach could help conceptualize and standardize the collection and reporting of CNCP-relevant metrics, compare them across health systems, and optimize care and treatment outcomes in opioid-treated CNCP.

Addiction stigma and opioid use in chronic non-cancer pain management in Nigeria.

This study uses 26 in-depth interviews conducted with people who use drugs (PWUD) who had sought care for chronic non-cancer pain in public health facilities in Nigeria, to explore how drug consumption stigma constitutes patient legitimacy based on neoliberal ideals. It found drug consumption stigma to be salient and pervasive in PWUD health-care encounters, operating through interpersonal interactions and institutionalised policies and practices to shape access to care. Crucially, stigma emerged through disciplinary opioid prescribing and dispensing practices that defined, categorised and marginalised PWUD based on how their drug consumption disrupted normative values of rationality and responsibility. Accounts additionally revealed disengagement from biomedical care and reliance on alternative pain management approaches (e.g. herbal remedies and illegal drugs), which show how structural positions shape the exercise of choice and agency in socially marginalised populations. In conclusion, the study considers the need to improve the health-care experiences of PWUD as a strategy for enhancing health-care engagement and improving health outcomes. It called for interventions to address the structural factors and interactional dynamics that influence stigma in health-care settings as well as for a review of current guidelines and practices to improve access to opioids for chronic non-cancer pain management.

Evaluation of a pharmacist-led interprofessional chronic pain clinic in Canada.

Chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) is a common condition that affects individuals at a biopsychosocial level and can significantly impair function and quality of life. Referral to an interprofessional CNCP program is recommended for most patients; however, these clinics are limited in number and capacity. Expanding access by testing new service delivery models would be of value. The purpose of this study was to measure the impact of a new pharmacist-led, interprofessional model of care developed at the University of Saskatchewan Chronic Pain Clinic. A retrospective chart audit was conducted using data that included adult patients referred for CNCP management between May 2020 and December 2021. Medication use, overall health status (using the Clinical Global Impression of Change-Improvement [CGI-I] scale) and patient readiness to change (using the Transtheoretical Model) were measured 6 months after the initial appointment. The study included 138 patients. Of the 80 patients taking an opioid, 22.5% were switched to buprenorphine/naloxone and the remainder had their mean morphine-equivalent dose reduced by a mean of 41.7 mg/d. Overall patient health status was minimally improved and many patients moved into the Action stage of change. Changes in opioid use demonstrate a clinically important shift toward safer medication regimens that are less likely to lead to toxicity and unintended overdose. CGI-I data suggest that these patients, whose health status is typically very difficult to change, did not deteriorate but slightly improved after attending the clinic. The unique pharmacist-led, interprofessional model of care used by the University of Saskatchewan Chronic Pain Clinic may offer a viable alternative to traditional physician-led models.

Cancer Pain Management: A Narrative Review of Current Concepts, Strategies, and Techniques.

Pain is frequently reported during cancer disease, and it still remains poorly controlled in 40% of patients. Recent developments in oncology have helped to better control pain. Targeted treatments may cure cancer disease and significantly increase survival. Therefore, a novel population of patients (cancer survivors) has emerged, also enduring chronic pain (27.6% moderate to severe pain). The present review discusses the different options currently available to manage pain in (former) cancer patients in light of progress made in the last decade. Major progress in the field includes the recent development of a chronic cancer pain taxonomy now included in the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) and the update of the WHO analgesic ladder. Until recently, cancer pain management has mostly relied on pharmacotherapy, with opioids being considered as the mainstay. The opioids crisis has prompted the reassessment of opioids use in cancer patients and survivors. This review focuses on the current utilization of opioids, the neuropathic pain component often neglected, and the techniques and non-pharmacological strategies available which help to personalize patient treatment. Cancer pain management is now closer to the management of chronic non-cancer pain, i.e., "an integrative and supportive pain care" aiming to improve patient's quality of life.

Attrition of methylnaltrexone treatment-emergent adverse events in patients with chronic noncancer pain and opioid-induced constipation: a post hoc pooled analysis of two clinical trials.

Background: Opioids prescribed for the management of chronic noncancer pain are associated with nausea, vomiting, and constipation. Methylnaltrexone, a peripherally acting µ-opioid receptor antagonist, has demonstrated robust efficacy and was well-tolerated in treating opioid-induced constipation without affecting central analgesia. Our objective was to assess changes in the frequency of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) after the first or second dose of methylnaltrexone or placebo. Methods: This post hoc analysis pooled data from two randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials assessing methylnaltrexone for opioid-induced constipation in the outpatient setting. Patients received subcutaneous methylnaltrexone (12 mg once daily or 12 mg once every other day), oral methylnaltrexone (150, 300, or 450 mg daily), or placebo. TEAEs, opioid withdrawal symptoms, pain intensity, and rescue-free bowel movements (RFBMs) within 4 hours of the first dose (i.e., RFBM responders) were assessed. Associations between TEAE frequencies and RFBM response were also evaluated. Results: The analysis included 1263 adult patients with chronic noncancer pain. TEAE rates declined from treatment day 1 to 2 (methylnaltrexone: 16.2%-5.3%; placebo: 6.6%-5.4%). Among methylnaltrexone-treated patients, significantly greater proportions of RFBM responders versus nonresponders reported gastrointestinal TEAEs on day 1. No associations between RFBM response and the frequency of TEAEs were observed in the placebo group. No meaningful changes in opioid withdrawal symptoms or pain intensity were observed. Conclusions: Early-onset TEAEs following methylnaltrexone treatment, particularly gastrointestinal TEAEs, are at least partially due to laxation. Methylnaltrexone treatment effectively relieves opioid-induced constipation without affecting the central analgesic effects of opioids.

The intersection of drug use discrimination and racial discrimination in the management of chronic non-cancer pain in United States primary care safety-net clinics: Implications for healthcare system and clinic-level changes

BackgroundClinicians’ bias related to patients’ race and substance use history play a role in pain management. However, patients’ or clinicians’ understandings about discriminatory practices and the structural factors that contribute to and exacerbate these practices are underexamined. We report on perceptions of discrimination from the perspectives of patients with chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) and a history of substance use and their clinicians within the structural landscape of reductions in opioid prescribing in the United States. MethodsWe interviewed 46 clinicians and 94 patients, using semi-structured interview guides, from eight safety-net primary care clinics across the San Francisco Bay Area from 2013 to 2020. We used a modified grounded theory approach to code and analyze transcripts. ResultsClinicians discussed using opioid prescribing guidelines with the goals of increased opioid safety and reduced bias in patient monitoring. While patients acknowledged the validity of clinicians’ concerns about opioid safety, they indicated that clinicians made assumptions about opioid misuse towards Black patients and patients suspected of substance use. Clinicians discussed evidence of discrimination in opioid prescribing at the clinic-wide level; racialized stereotypes about patients likely to misuse opioids; and their own struggles to overcome discriminatory practices regarding CNCP management. ConclusionWhile clinicians and patients acknowledged opioid safety concerns, the practical application of opioid prescribing guidelines impacted how patients perceived and engaged with CNCP care particularly for patients who are Black and/or report a history of substance use. We recommend healthcare system and clinic-level interventions that may remediate discriminatory practices and associated disparities.

Telehealth for management of chronic non-cancer pain and opioid use disorder in safety net primary care

BackgroundThe SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic increased use of telehealth for the management of opioid use disorder and chronic non-cancer pain in primary care safety net clinical systems. Significant barriers to telehealth exist, little is known about how these barriers impact urban safety net, primary care providers and their patients. The objective of this study was to qualitatively assess the benefits and challenges of telehealth for management of chronic non-cancer pain, opioid use disorder, and multi-morbidity in primary care, safety net clinical systems.MethodsWe interviewed patients with chronic non-cancer pain and history of substance use (n = 22) and their primary care clinicians (n = 7) in the San Francisco Bay Area, March-July 2020. We recorded, transcribed, coded, and content analyzed interviews.ResultsCOVID-19 shelter-in-place orders contributed to increases in substance use and uncontrolled pain, and posed challenges for monitoring opioid safety and misuse through telehealth. None of the clinics used video visits due to low digital literacy/access. Benefits of telehealth included decreased patient burden and missed appointments and increased convenience and control of some chronic conditions (e.g., diabetes, hypertension). Telehealth challenges included loss of contact, greater miscommunication, and less comprehensive care interactions.ConclusionsThis study is one of the first to examine telehealth use in urban safety net primary care patients with co-occurring chronic non-cancer pain and substance use. Decisions to continue or expand telehealth should consider patient burden, communication and technology challenges, pain control, opioid misuse, and medical complexity.

Knowledge, attitudes and practices of neurologists regarding the management of chronic non-cancer pain in the Republic of Moldova

Background: Chronic pain is a public health problem due to its high prevalence, disability, and associated comorbidities. In the Republic of Moldova, there are no health policies or strategies regarding chronic pain, and the burden on the population is not known because it is not registered nor monitored by the state. The aim was to analyze the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of neurologists regarding the management of chronic pain in the Republic of Moldova. Material and methods: Mixed observational study (qualitative and quantitative) was designed and carried out using a Knowledge, Attitudes, Practices research questionnaire. The study includes 50 neurologists, average age of 47.4±9.52 years, women (82%), and urban area (80%), interacting with chronic pain patients on a daily basis (86%). Results: 42% of neurologists know about pain measurement tools, 40% of them use these pain measurement tools, 40% of neurologist know clinical guidelines, 92% of them practice pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments. The neurologists (62%) presented negative attitudes about chronic pain patients. Just 18% of them have sufficient knowledge and skills to deal with such a patient, 64% of neurologists received training on chronic pain issues. Conclusions: Neurologists have little knowledge of pain measurement tools and guidelines and don’t use them, which makes chronic pain poorly addressed, evaluated, and treated at the national level. They recognize the right of the patient to live without suffering and to benefit from quality services focused on their needs, but consider patients difficult to approach, communicate and work with.

High-dose opioids for chronic non-cancer pain: an overview of Cochrane Reviews.

This overview was originally published in 2017, and is being updated in 2022. Chronic pain is typically described as pain on most days for at least three months. Chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) is any chronic pain that is not due to a malignancy. Chronic non-cancer pain in adults is a common and complex clinical issue, for which opioids are prescribed by some physicians for pain management. There are concerns that the use of high doses of opioids for CNCP lacks evidence of effectiveness, and may increase the risk of adverse events. To describe the evidence from Cochrane Reviews and overviews regarding the efficacy and safety of high-dose opioids (defined as 200 mg morphine equivalent or more per day) for CNCP. We identified Cochrane Reviews and overviews by searching the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews in The Cochrane Library. The date of the last search was 21 July 2022. Two overview authors independently assessed the search results. We planned to analyse data on any opioid agent used at a high dose for two weeks or more for the treatment of CNCP in adults. We did not identify any reviews or overviews that met the inclusion criteria. The excluded reviews largely reflected low doses or titrated doses, where all doses were analysed as a single group; we were unable to extract any data for high-dose use only. There is a critical lack of high-quality evidence, in the form of Cochrane Reviews, about how well high-dose opioids work for the management of CNCP in adults, and regarding the presence and severity of adverse events. No evidence-based argument can be made on the use of high-dose opioids, i.e. 200 mg morphine equivalent or more daily, in clinical practice. Considering that high-dose opioids have been, and are still being used in clinical practice to treat CNCP, knowing about the efficacy and safety of these higher doses is imperative.