Opioid Analgesics In Patients Research Articles

Simulation tools in ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia: developing a simple, inexpensive erector spinae plane (ESP) block teaching model.

The erector spinae plane (ESP) block is an increasingly utilized regional block in the emergency department, representing one effective alternative or adjunct to opioid analgesia in patients presenting with rib fractures. While there is growing interest, its widespread adoption faces hurdles, such as a lack of appropriate training resources. Gelatin-based phantoms to simulate human anatomy have been widely used to facilitate ultrasound-guided procedures, although no such model for the ESP block has yet been defined in the literature. To address this gap, we sought to design and assemble an inexpensive, simple to build, reusable phantom to simulate the sonographic anatomy of the posterior thoracic wall and serve as a task trainer for an ultrasound-guided ESP block. This novel phantom model reproduces an ultrasonographic fascial plane using a gelatin medium and 3D-printed thoracic spine with ribs allowing for needle guidance and hydrodissection.

Evaluation of opioid prescribing for surgical patients discharged from three metropolitan hospitals between 2012 and 2020.

This multicentre, retrospective medical record audit evaluated opioid analgesia prescribing within a Victorian metropolitan public hospital network. The study included all surgical patients discharged between January 2012 and December 2020 with one or more discharge prescriptions from three metropolitan hospitals (n = 117,989). The main outcome measures were mean oral morphine equivalent daily dose (OMEDD), mean number of opioid types and proportion of patients prescribed one or more slow-release opioids on discharge.Total opioid prescribing (mean OMEDD) peaked in 2013. Between 2017 and 2020 there was a trend towards prescribing fewer opioids on discharge. Over the study period, there was decreasing prescription of codeine and increasing prescription of oxycodone and tapentadol. The proportion of patients prescribed slow-release opioids increased in the earlier years of the study, reaching a peak of 20.6% in 2017. Since 2017 there has been a rapid reduction in the prescription of slow-release opioids.Subanalysis was undertaken to evaluate key changes in the opioid prescribing landscape in the health network. The removal of default opioid pack sizes in the electronic medication management system (December 2014) and the release of the Faculty of Pain Medicine-Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists' statement regarding the use of opioid analgesics in patients with chronic non-cancer pain (March 2018) were associated with significant reductions in mean OMEDD prescribed on discharge (136 mg vs 122 mg and 120 mg vs 85.4 mg, respectively, P < 0.001).In conclusion, the quantity of opioids prescribed on discharge in this patient group peaked in 2013 and has been decreasing since.

Survey of Prophylactic Administration of Naldemedine for Opioid-induced Constipation

Opioid-induced constipation (OIC), an adverse event that occurs due to opioid analgesics, reportedly causes poor quality of life and adherence to opioid analgesics in patients. Therefore, this issue must be addressed appropriately. Naldemedine (NAL), a peripherally-acting μ-opioid receptor antagonist, is currently recommended for treating OIC when other laxatives are ineffective, but there have been no clinical reports of NAL being used prophylactically for OIC. Therefore, we conducted a retrospective survey of hospitalized patients who received NAL as prophylaxis for OIC with strong opioid analgesics to clarify the reality of this situation and to consider points to be taken into account in its clinical implementation. In this study, 61.7% of the subjects had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 3 or higher. The rate of addition of new laxatives and increased laxatives during seven days of NAL prophylaxis was 46.8%, and the rate of diarrhea was 6.1%. This study suggests that patients initiated with strong opioid analgesics during hospitalization often presented with poor performance status, and it is important to pay attention to constipation even under NAL prophylaxis. However, the incidence of diarrhea was low, and the safety of NAL prophylaxis was considered to be good.

Hospital admission medication reconciliation in high-risk prescription opioid users

No studies have assessed the clinical significance of medication reconciliation in surgical patients using high-risk extended-release/long-acting (ER/LA) opioid medications.We assessed differences in the perioperative use of opioid analgesics in patients who underwent medication reconciliation upon hospital admission compared to patients who did not and identified predictors of perioperative use of opioids.Retrospective observational quasi-experimental study including adult non-cancer patients who underwent elective surgery at UCSF Medical Center in the period January 2017 through December 2019 and received at least one opioid analgesic during surgical hospitalization. The primary study outcome was perioperative use of opioids measured in daily oral morphine equivalents (OME). Secondary outcomes were predictors of perioperative use of opioids after adjusting for baseline differences between groups.We identified 402 patients. Of them, 59.5% were female. The mean patient age was 58.5 years. Most patients underwent neurological or orthopedic surgery (each 40.8%). Over 94.3% of our patients underwent medication reconciliation upon hospital admission, with 78.4% completed by a pharmacy staff. Medication reconciliation evidenced that 5.5% patients were not taking the ER/LA opioids on their medication history list. Inactive ER/LA opioids were discontinued during hospitalization. None of the patients with inactive ER/LA opioids had those opioids restarted at hospital discharge. In addition, patients (26.9%) were successfully converted from ER/LA to SA opioids. After adjusting for patients' demographic and clinical characteristics, surgical procedure type and post-operative pain, opioid formulation conversion was the main predictor of perioperative use of opioids per hospitalization day. Switching patients from ER/LA to SA opioids reduced the mean daily use of OME by 66.03 units (p < 0.02) without adversely impacting postoperative pain.Medication reconciliation upon hospital admission reduced unnecessary exposure to opioids in hospitalized surgical patients.

Paper 03: Multimodal Pain Regimen is Equivalent to Opioid Analgesia Following Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Surgery: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

Objectives:To evaluate the efficacy of a multimodal non-opioid analgesic protocol in controlling postoperative pain compared to opioids following a primary arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.Methods:Seventy consecutive patients undergoing a primary rotator cuff repair were assessed eligibility. A prospective randomized controlled trial was designed in accordance with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials 2010 (CONSORT) statement. The two arms of the study included a multimodal non-opioid pain regimen for the experimental group, and a standard of care narcotics for the control group. The primary outcome was visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores for the first ten postoperative days. Secondary outcomes included PROMIS-PI, patient satisfaction, and adverse drug events. Patients were randomized using a random number generator. Whiles patients were not blinded to their treatment group, all reported outcomes were collected by blinded observers.Results:Twenty-six patients either declined to participate or were excluded from the study. Forty-four patients were included in the final analysis. A total of 27 patients were in the traditional group and 17 patients were in the nonopioid group. Patients in the traditional pain control group reported a significantly lower VAS pain score on post-operative day 1 (opioid: 5.7 ± 2, nonopioid: 3.7 ± 2.2, p=0.011) and post-operative day 4 (opioid: 4.4 ± 2.7, nonopioid: 2.4 ± 2.2, p=0.023). No significant difference was seen on any other postoperative day. When mixed measured models were used to control for confounding factors the non-opioid group demonstrated significantly lower VAS and PROMIS-PI scores (p<0.01) at every time point. The most commonly reported side effects for patients in both groups were drowsiness (opioid: 2.7 ± 3.3 days, nonopioid: 1.9 ± 3.3 days) and constipation (opioid: 2.2 ± 2.9 days, nonopioid: 0.2 ± 0.6 days). Patients in the traditional analgesia group reported significantly greater average number of days with constipation (opioid: 2.2 ± 2.9, nonopioid: 0.2 ± 0.6, p=0.003) and days with upset stomach (opioid: 1.3 ± 2.5, nonopioid: 0.0 ± 0.0, p=0.020) than those in the nonopioid group.Conclusions:This study found that a multimodal nonopioid pain protocol provided at least equivalent pain control compared to traditional opioid analgesics in patients undergoing primary arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. Minimal side effects were noted with some improvement in the multimodal nonopioid pain cohort, and all patients reported satisfaction with their pain management.

Review of publications evaluating opioid use in patients with inflammatory rheumatic disease.

This article discusses publications assessing the prevalence, efficacy, and safety of opioid analgesics in patients with rheumatic diseases, including rheumatoid arthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, psoriatic arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, and systemic sclerosis. Recent studies show long-term opioid use is common in patients with inflammatory rheumatic disease. We did not find any studies demonstrating improved function or pain control with long-term opioid use in people with rheumatic diseases. Some data shows potential adverse effects including increased risk for fractures and opioid poisoning hospitalizations. There is evidence demonstrating an association of opioid use with mental health disorders, fibromyalgia, obesity, and disability, although causative links have not been established. Only minimal reductions in opioid use were observed after initiation of biologic disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). Studies have shown delayed DMARD initiation and reduced DMARD use in patients on opioids, raising concerns that these analgesics may delay care or initially mask symptoms of active disease. Available literature highlights high levels of opioid use in people with rheumatic disease, without scientific evidence to support efficacy for chronic pain control and increasing evidence of adverse events. These findings strongly suggest that opioids do not have a routine role in the chronic management of inflammatory rheumatic diseases.

COMET – effectiveness and tolerability of methocarbamol versus oral opioid-analgesics as add-on measure in patients with non-specific low back pain refractory to recommended 1st line treatments. A retrospective analysis of depersonalized propensity score matched open-label real-world 4-week data from the German Pain e-Registry

Background To compare the 4-week effectiveness and tolerability of an add-on treatment with oral high dose methocarbamol (MET) vs long-acting oral opioid analgesics (LAO) in patients with non-specific low back pain (nsLBP) poorly responsive to recommended 1st line treatments. Methods Analysis of anonymized, propensity score-matched real-world data from the German Pain e-Registry, using a sequential non-inferiority superiority approach, for adult outpatients with nsLBP who had initiated treatment with MET or LAO between 1st January 2018 and 31st December 2019 (EUPAS identifier: 38484). The primary effectiveness variable was the absolute change of the average 24-h. pain intensity index (PIX). Safety was assessed by incidence of physician-confirmed drug-related adverse events (DRAEs), and DRAEs leading to discontinuation. Results Propensity score-matched data were analyzed for 374 patients treated with MET and 374 patients treated with LAO. Mean ± SD (median) MET dose over the 4-week evaluation period was 2390.4 ± 1980 (3000) mg and 69.6 ± 25.9 (60) mg morphine equivalent for LAO. With 25.8 ± 11.4 (median 26, 95%CI: 24.5–27.1) vs. 11.4 ± 6.8 (median 11; 95%CI: 10.6–12.2) mm VAS, absolute 4-week improvement vs. baseline was superior for MET vs. LAO [p < .001; effect size 1.6; least square mean difference 14.4 (95%CI: 13.4–15.3)]. Percentages of patients with a PIX improvement ≥ MCID was 81.8 vs. 24.6% [p < .001; OR: 13.8 (9.7–19.6), RR: 4.0 (3.2–5.0), NNT: 1.7]. A significantly lower number of patients treated with MET vs. LAO reported DRAEs in response to study medication: 36 (9.6%) vs. 139 (37.2%; p < .001; NNT 4), and 9 patients treated with MET (2.4%) vs. 86 (23.0%) treated with LAO discontinued treatment in response to these DRAEs (p < .001; NNT: 5). Conclusion 4-week add-on treatment with MET in patients with nsLBP who showed an inadequate response to recommended 1st line treatments is superior effective to LAO and significantly better tolerated. KEY MESSAGES Low back pain is the most common musculoskeletal problem worldwide. In the majority of patients, LBP does not have a specific cause and the most prevalently coded form is mechanical, non-specific (ns) LBP associated with muscular tension, restrictions in mobility, and static malposition. Current treatment recommendations for nsLBP are largely “non-specific” as well, limited to symptomatic pain-relieving measures. In our propensity score-matched two cohort analyses of depersonalized real-world data from the German Pain e-Registry, a 4-week treatment with the muscle relaxant methocarbamol proved superior effective and significantly better tolerated than treatment with oral long-acting opioid analgesics in patients who poorly responded to recommended 1st line treatments.

Multimodal Nonopioid Pain Protocol Provides Better or Equivalent Pain Control Compared to Opioid Analgesia Following Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Surgery: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

To evaluate the efficacy of a multimodal nonopioid analgesic protocol in controlling postoperative pain compared to opioids following a primary arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. Seventy consecutive patients undergoing a primary rotator cuff repair were assessed for eligibility. An observer-blinded prospective randomized controlled trial was designed in accordance with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials 2010 (CONSORT) statement. The two arms of the study included a multimodal nonopioid pain regimen for the experimental group, and a standard of care narcotics for the control group. The primary outcome was visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores for the first 10 postoperative days. Secondary outcomes included PROMIS-PI (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-Pain Interference) scale, patient satisfaction, and adverse drug events. Thirty patients declined to participate or were excluded, and 40 patients were included in the final analysis. A total of 23 patients were in the traditional group, and 17 patients were in the nonopioid group. Control patients on opioid pain management reported a significantly higher VAS pain score on postoperative day 1 (opioid: 5.7 ± 2, nonopioid: 3.7 ± 2.2; P= .011) and postoperative day 4 (opioid: 4.4 ± 2.7, nonopioid: 2.4 ± 2.2; P= .023). No significant difference was seen on any other postoperative day. When mixed measured models were used to control for confounding factors, the nonopioid group demonstrated significantly lower VAS and PROMIS-PI scores (P < .01) at every time point. Patients in the traditional analgesia group reported significantly more days with constipation (P= .003) and days with upset stomach (P= .020) than those in the nonopioid group. The present study found that a multimodal nonopioid pain protocol provided equivalent or better pain control compared to traditional opioid analgesics in patients undergoing primary arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. Minimal side effects were noted with some improvement in the multimodal nonopioid pain cohort. All patients reported satisfaction with their pain management. Level I, prospective randomized controlled trial.

Can We Eliminate Opioids After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction? A Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial

Background: Multimodal pain protocols have been effective for postsurgical pain control; however, no published protocol has been effective in eliminating opioid consumption. Purpose: To compare a multimodal nonopioid pain protocol versus traditional opioid medication for postoperative pain control in patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Study Design: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. Methods: A total of 90 patients undergoing primary ACLR were assessed for participation. We performed a prospective, randomized controlled trial in accordance with the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) 2010 statement. The study arms were a multimodal nonopioid analgesic protocol (acetaminophen, ketorolac, diazepam, gabapentin, and meloxicam) and a standard opioid regimen (hydrocodone-acetaminophen), and the primary outcome was postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores for 10 days. Secondary outcomes included patient-reported outcomes, complications, and satisfaction. The observers were blinded, and the patients were not blinded to the intervention. Results: A total of 9 patients did not meet inclusion criteria, and 19 patients declined participation. Thus, 62 patients were analyzed, with 28 patients randomized to the opioid group and 34 to the multimodal nonopioid group. Patients receiving the multimodal nonopioid pain regimen demonstrated significantly lower VAS scores compared with patients who received opioid pain medication (P < .05). Patients were administered the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement and Information System Pain Interference Short Form, and no significant difference was found in patients’ preoperative scores (opioid group, 58.6 ± 7.9; multimodal nonopioid group, 57.5 ± 7.4; P = .385) and 1-week postoperative scores (opioid group, 66.3 ± 8.2; multimodal nonopioid group, 61.4 ± 8.8; P = .147). When we adjusted for possible confounders (age, sex, body mass index, graft type), no significant differences in pain control were found between the 2 groups. The most common adverse effects for both groups were drowsiness and constipation, with no difference between the groups. All patients in the multimodal nonopioid group reported satisfactory pain management. Conclusions: A multimodal nonopioid pain protocol provided at least equivalent pain control compared with traditional opioid analgesics in patients undergoing ACLR. Minimal side effects, which did not differ between groups, were noted, and all patients reported satisfaction with their pain management.

Effectiveness, Safety, and Tolerability of Nabiximols Oromucosal Spray vs Typical Oral Long-Acting Opioid Analgesics in Patients with Severe Neuropathic Back Pain: Analysis of 6-Month Real-World Data from the German Pain e-Registry.

ObjectiveTo compare the effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of add-on nabiximols (NBX) oromucosal spray vs typical oral long-acting opioid (LAO) analgesics in patients with severe (± chronic) peripheral neuropathic back pain poorly responsive to other treatments.MethodsRetrospective analysis of anonymized, propensity score–matched data from the German Pain e-Registry of adult outpatients who initiated NBX or LAO between March 2017 and March 2020.ResultsData were analyzed from propensity score–matched patients treated with NBX (n = 655) or LAO (n = 655): mean age ≈51 years; 57% female; mean pain duration ≈2.6 years; chronic pain 61%; severe dysfunctional pain 93%. At 6 months, NBX was noninferior to LAO for overall symptom relief, based on the least-squares mean difference between cohorts in change from baseline in patient-reported, pain-related aggregated nine-item scale scores (−27.84%; 95% confidence interval [CI] −29.71 to −25.96; P < 0.001) and individual pain-related scale scores. Subsequent prespecified superiority analysis of the primary endpoint showed that NBX was superior to LAO: all secondary endpoints measuring symptoms of pain and physical function improved significantly with NBX and LAO, with between-group differences favoring NBX (all P < 0.001). Fewer patients treated with NBX than LAO experienced treatment-related adverse events (25.5% vs 76.0%; P < 0.001) or discontinued treatment because of treatment-related adverse events (7.9% vs 29.3%; P < 0.001).ConclusionWithin study limitations (e.g., observational design, all potential biases), add-on NBX was superior to and better tolerated than add-on treatment with typical oral LAO analgesics in patients with neuropathic back pain inadequately controlled by recommended/established systemic therapies.

Barriers, facilitators, and resources to opioid deprescribing in primary care: experiences of general practitioners in Australia.

Deprescribing is the systematic process of discontinuing drugs when harms outweigh the benefits. We conducted semistructured telephone interviews with 22 general practitioners (GPs) who had prescribed or deprescribed opioids in patients with chronic noncancer pain within the past 6 months to investigate the barriers and facilitators to deprescribing opioid analgesics in patients with chronic noncancer pain. We also explored GPs' perspectives on the available resources to assist them with opioid deprescribing. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and then coded using an iterative process until data saturation reached. The thematic analysis process identified themes, first as concepts, and then refined to overarching themes after the merging of similar subthemes. Themes exploring barriers to deprescribing highlighted the difficulties GPs face while considering patient factors and varying prescribing practices within the confines of the health system. Patient motivation and doctor-patient rapport were central factors to facilitate deprescribing and GPs considered the most important deprescribing resource to be a multidisciplinary network of clinicians to support themselves and their patients. Therefore, although GPs emphasised the importance of deprescribing opioid analgesics, they also expressed many barriers relating to managing complex pain conditions, patient factors, and varying prescribing practices between clinicians. Some of these barriers could be mitigated by GPs having time and resources to educate and build rapport with their patients. This suggests the need for further development of multimodal resources and improved support through the public health system to enable GPs to prioritise patient-centred care.

Continuous Pectoral Nerve Block Compared With Continuous Thoracic Paravertebral Block and Intravenous Opioid Analgesia for the Postoperative Analgesic Efficacy in Patients Undergoing Modified Radical Mastectomy: A Prospective Randomized Trial.

Postoperative pain following mastectomy is often severe and pain management is necessary. We evaluated the analgesic efficacy of continuous pectoral nerve block (PEC) in comparison with that of the continuous thoracic paravertebral block (TPVB) and the intravenous opioid analgesia in patients scheduled for modified radical mastectomy (MRM). A total of 90 female patients aged 20 to 70 years, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I to III, undergoing unilateral MRM were randomly allocated into 3 groups. All patients received postoperative morphine patient-controlled analgesia (PCA). Continuous TPVB and continuous PECs were added in group II and group III, respectively. Postoperative morphine consumption during the first 48 hours and postoperative visual analog scale were recorded. The cumulative morphine consumption in the first 24 hours postoperative was higher in the PCA-M group (27.47±4.95 mg) than that of the TPVB group (8.43±2.67 mg) and PEC group (13.47±3.89 mg) (P<0.001, confidence interval: 16.6-21.5 and 11.6-16.4, respectively). It was significantly higher in the PEC group as compared with the TPVB group (P<0.001, confidence interval: 2.6-7.5). On admission to postanesthesia care unit till 2 hours postoperative, the median visual analog scale score at rest was higher in the PCA-M group than that of the TPVB group (P<0.05) and PEC group (P<0.05) without statistical difference between the TPVB group and PEC group. Continuous PEC and continuous TPVB reduced the postoperative morphine consumptions as compared with the intravenous opioid analgesia in patients undergoing MRM with greater reduction in TPVB and without increased adverse effects.

In Silico Simulation of the Systemic Drug Exposure Following the Topical Application of Opioid Analgesics in Patients with Cutaneous Lesions.

The use of opioid analgesics in treating severe pain is frequently associated with putative adverse effects in humans. Topical agents that are shown to have high efficacy with a favorable safety profile in clinical settings are great alternatives for pain management of multimodal analgesia. However, the risk of side effects induced by transdermal absorption and systemic exposure is of great concern as they are challenging to predict. The present study aimed to use “BIOiSIM” an artificial intelligence-integrated biosimulation platform to predict the transdermal disposition of opioid analgesics. The model successfully predicted their exposure following the topical application of central opioid agonist buprenorphine and peripheral agonist oxycodone in healthy human subjects with simulation of intra-skin exposure in subjects with burns and pressure wounds. The predicted plasma levels of analgesics were used to evaluate the safety of the therapeutic pain control in patients with the dermal structural impairments caused by acute (burns) or chronic cutaneous lesions (pressure wounds) with topical opioid analgesics.

The role of regional anaesthesia in the emerging subspecialty of onco-anaesthesia: a state-of-the-art review.

Cancer accounts for millions of deaths globally each year, predominantly due to recurrence and metastatic disease. The majority of patients with primary solid organ cancers require surgery, however, some degree of tumour dissemination related to surgery is inevitable. The surgical stress response and associated immunosuppression, pain, inflammation, tissue hypoxia and angiogenesis have all been implicated in promoting tumour survival, proliferation and recurrence. Regional anaesthesia was hypothesised to reduce the surgical stress response and immunosuppression, minimise the need for volatile anaesthesia and reduce pain and opioid requirements, thus mitigating pro-tumour pathways associated with the peri-operative period and improving long-term oncological outcomes. While some retrospective studies suggested an association between regional anaesthesia and reduced cancer recurrence, the first large randomised controlled trial on the effect of anaesthetic technique on cancer outcome found no significant difference between paravertebral regional anaesthesia and volatile anaesthesia with opioid analgesia in patients undergoing breast cancer surgery. Randomised controlled trials on the long-term oncological outcomes of regional anaesthesia in other tumour types are ongoing. The focus on how peri-operative interventions, especially regional anaesthesia, during cancer resection surgery, may enhance short-term recovery and perhaps influence long-term outcome has spawned the global emergence of the subspecialty of onco-anaesthesia. This review aims to discuss the most recent evidence on the use of regional anaesthesia in cancer surgery and the significance of its role in onco-anaesthesia.

Relationship Between Adherence to Opioid Analgesics and Pain Beliefs Among Patients with Cancer Pain at Tertiary Care Hospitals in Malaysia.

ContextPain is a common and distressing symptom among cancer patients. Opioid analgesics are the mainstay of cancer pain management, and adequate adherence plays an important role in achieving good pain control.PurposeTo determine the level of adherence to opioid analgesics in patients with cancer pain and to identify factors that may influence the adherence.Patient and MethodsThis was a cross-sectional study conducted from March to June 2018 at two tertiary care hospitals in Malaysia. Study instruments consisted of a set of validated questionnaires; the Medication Compliance Questionnaire, Brief Pain Inventory and Pain Opioid Analgesic Beliefs─Cancer scale.ResultsA total of 134 patients participated in this study. The patients’ adherence scores ranged from 52–100%. Factors with a moderate, statistically significant negative correlation with adherence were negative effect beliefs (rs= −0.53, p<0.001), pain endurance beliefs (rs = −0.49, p<0.001) and the use of aqueous morphine (rs = −0.26, p=0.002). A multiple linear regression model on these predictors resulted in a final model which accounted for 47.0% of the total variance in adherence (R2 = 0.47, F (7, 126) = 15.75, p<0.001). After controlling for other variables, negative effect beliefs were the strongest contributor to the model (β = −0.39, p<0.001) and uniquely explained 12.3% of the total variance.ConclusionThe overall adherence to opioid analgesics among Malaysian patients with cancer pain was good. Negative effects beliefs regarding cancer pain and opioids strongly predicted adherence.

Deprescribing Opioids in Chronic Non-cancer Pain: Systematic Review of Randomised Trials.

Deprescribing, the process of reducing or discontinuing unnecessary or harmful medicines is an essential part of clinical practice. To evaluate the efficacy of interventions designed to deprescribe opioid analgesics for pain relief in patients with chronic non-cancer pain. We searched electronic databases, including clinical trial registries, from database inception to 13th January 2020 without restrictions, and conducted citation tracking. Our systematic review included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating interventions reducing the prescription, or use of opioid analgesics in patients with chronic pain versus control. Inventions could be aimed at the patient, clinician, or both. We excluded trials enrolling patients with cancer or illicit drug use. Two authors independently screened and extracted data. Outcome follow-up timepoints were short (≤ 3months), intermediate (> 3 but < 12months) or long (≥ 12months) term. Primary outcome was the reduction in opioid dose [morphine milligram equivalent (MME) mg/day]. Methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. We included ten patient-focused RCT interventions (n = 835; median 37 participants) and 2 testing clinician-focused interventions (n = 291 clinicians); none at low risk of bias. Patient-focused interventions did not reduce opioid dose in the intermediate term [e.g. dose reduction protocol, mean difference (MD) - 19.9 MME, 95% CI - 107.5 to 67.7], nor did they increase the number of participants who ceased their dose, or increase the risk of serious adverse events or adverse events. One clinician intervention of education plus decision tools versus decision tools alone reduced the number of opioid prescriptions (risk difference (RD) - 0.1, 95% CI - 0.2 to - 0.1), dose (MD - 5.3 MME, 95% CI - 6.2 to - 4.5) and use (RD - 0.1, 95% CI - 0.1 to - 0.0) in the long term. Study heterogeneity prevented meta-analysis. The small number of studies and heterogeneity prevented firm conclusions to recommend any one opioid-analgesic-deprescribing strategy in patients with chronic pain. PROSPERO CRD42017068422.

Adjuvant interventions with opioids for vaso-occlusive crisis in sickle cell disease: A mixed treatment network meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials.

Vaso-occlusive crisis is the most common clinical feature requiring opioid analgesics in patients with sickle cell disease. We conducted a network meta-analysis to compare the drugs that can be used as add-on with opioids for vaso-occlusive crisis. Network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Sickle cell disease patients with vaso-occlusive crisis receiving adjuvants to opioids for pain management. A number of patients with complete pain relief and pain scores assessed either by visual ana-log or by a numerical rating scale were the primary outcomes. Adverse events and dose of opioids (in morphine equiva-lents) for pain alleviation between the treatment arms were the secondary outcome measures. Eleven studies evaluating the addition of ketorolac, magnesium sulfate, ketoprofen, ibuprofen, methadone, inhalational nitric oxide, methylprednisolone, and arginine with morphine were obtained. The pooled analysis showed a favorable effect in the pain reduction for the additions of arginine {-2 [-3.39, -0.61]} and ibuprofen {-1.7 [-3.26, -0.14]} with morphine. Arginine has high probability of being the "best" in the pool followed by ibuprofen. No significant differ-ences were observed in the risk of adverse events {ketoprofen-0.84 [0.42, 1.65]; magnesium sulfate-1.81 [0.64, 5.81]; and arginine-2.08 [0.18, 24.31]}. A significant lower dose of opioid was required when given adjunctive to argin-ine, inhalational nitric oxide, and methylprednisolone. We observed that arginine and ibuprofen could produce additional analgesic effects when combined with morphine in vaso-occlusive crisis.

Dendritic cell vaccine as an alternative to opioid analgesia in patients with advanced cervical cancer.

e18022 Background: Locally advanced and progressive cervical cancer is always accompanied by the pain syndrome. The common analgesics include non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and opioids. The purpose of the study was to assess allogeneic dendritic cell vaccine (DCV) as an alternative analgesic in patients with advanced cervical cancer. Methods: The pain syndrome dynamics was assessed in 20 patients with advanced T3-4N1M0-1 cervical cancer receiving subcutaneous paravertebral injections of allogeneic DCV in a total alternating dose of 5-10 million cells every 2 weeks. Patients received DCV for one year, with a total of 24 vaccine therapy sessions and a total dosage of 180 million dendritic cells. The pain intensity was assessed on a verbal rating scale: 0 – no pain; 1 – mild pain; 2 – moderate pain; 3 – severe pain; 4 – extremely intense pain. Results: Prior to the therapy, 15 patients (75%) had severe pain; 2 (10%) - moderate pain; 3 (15%) - extremely intense pain. After 4-6 DCV injections, the pain intensity decreased, patients refused opioid analgesics. After 10-12 DCV sessions, 19 (95%) (p &lt; 0.05) women had no pain at all, patients denied additional pain relief with non-opioid analgesics. Unrelieved pain was registered only in one cervical cancer patient. Conclusions: DCV injections in patients with advanced cervical cancer provide pain relief thereby improving their quality of life.

Are medical comorbidities contributing to the use of opioid analgesics in patients with knee osteoarthritis?

Although opioid analgesics are not generally recommended for treatment of knee osteoarthritis (OA), they are frequently used. We sought to determine the association between medical comorbidities and self-reported opioid analgesic use in these patients. This cross-sectional study recruited patients referred to two provincial hip and knee clinics in Alberta, Canada for consideration of total knee arthroplasty. Standardized questionnaires assessed demographic (age, gender, income, education, social support, smoking status) and clinical (pain, function, total number of troublesome joints) characteristics, comorbid medical conditions, and non-surgical OA management participants had ever used or were currently using. Multivariable Poisson regression with robust estimate of the standard errors assessed the association between comorbid medical conditions and current opioid use, controlling for potential confounders. 2,127 patients were included: mean age 65.4 (SD 9.1) years and 59.2% female. Currently used treatments for knee OA were: 57.6% exercise and/or physiotherapy, 61.1% NSAIDs, and 29.8% opioid analgesics. In multivariable regression, controlling for potential confounders, comorbid hypertension (RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.02-1.37), gastrointestinal disease (RR 1.31, 95% CI 1.07-1.60), depressed mood (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.05-1.48) and a higher number of troublesome joints (RR 1.04 per joint, 95% CI 1.00-1.09) were associated with opioid use, with no association found with having ever used recommended non-opioid pharmacological or non-pharmacological treatments. In a large cohort of patients with knee OA, of 12 comorbidities assessed, comorbid hypertension, gastrointestinal disease, and depressed mood were associated with current use of opioid analgesics, in addition to total burden of troublesome joints. Improved guidance on the management of painful OA in the setting of common comorbidities is warranted.

Bilateral ultrasound-guided abdominal peripheral block in tap plane, tap - block

INTRODUCTION: Bilateral ultrasound-guided peripheral block (TAP - block) in the plane between the inner oblique abdominal muscle and the transversal abdominal muscle – TAP plane, is a regional anesthesia technique by infiltration of a local anesthetic, provides analgesia for operations involving the anterior abdominal wall. The analgesic effectiveness of the block decreases the consumption of opioid analgesics and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. AIM: In this study, we evaluated the intraoperative analgesic efficacy of bilateral TAP - block and the consumption of opioid analgesics in patients undergoing bilateral laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. METHODS: The study was conducted with 35 patients, who were randomized into two groups. In the control group (group I), there are patients who received general anesthesia (GA), and experimental group (group II), were patients who have received general anesthesia and a bilateral tap block (GA + TAP). RESULTS: Patients with TAP-block (group II) have significantly lower fentanyl consumption compared to group I. CONCLUSION: Multimodal approach for the simultaneous administration of general anesthesia with a TAP block provides effective intraoperative analgesia and significantly reduces the perioperative consumption of opioid analgesics.