Oral Morphine Equivalent Daily Dose Research Articles

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.

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.

Cultivating optimal analgesic prescribing practices in a metropolitan hospital network: evaluating an analgesic stewardship program

AbstractBackgroundThe increasing incidence of opioid‐related harm associated with inappropriate opioid prescription underscores the need for effective interventions directed at enhancing analgesic prescribing practices. Analgesic stewardship (AGS) programs have emerged to facilitate appropriate analgesic use, reducing analgesic‐related harm and optimising patient outcomes.AimThis study aimed to assess the impact of an AGS program on the appropriateness of opioid analgesia prescribing for adult inpatients within a metropolitan health network during the initial two months following program implementation.MethodThis retrospective audit examined de‐identified aggregate data of 100 adult inpatients of a major Australian metropolitan hospital network between August–September 2022. The multidisciplinary AGS program involving pharmacy, nursing, and medical staff provided clinical interventions and recommendations for patients, supported by organisational interventions, including education and guideline reinforcement. Data collection included patient demographics, clinical data, and AGS program recommendations documented in patient medical records. Ethical approval was granted by the Eastern Health Office of Research and Ethics (Reference no: QA23‐015‐91886) and the study confirms to the Australian Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research.ResultsIt was found that 51% of opioid‐naïve patients were prescribed modified‐release opioids for acute non‐cancer pain, contrary to local guidelines. The AGS program recommendations resulted in an 89.7% cessation of these prescriptions. For non‐opioid‐naïve patients, there was a statistically significant reduction in mean Oral Morphine Equivalent Daily Dose of 19.85 mg (95% confidence interval [CI] 10.3–29.4 mg, p &lt; 0.05). AGS recommendations were predominantly adhered to, with 82% showing full or partial compliance.ConclusionThis study highlights the positive impact of an AGS program on the appropriateness of opioid analgesic prescribing for adult inpatients. These findings support the implementation of AGS programs into healthcare systems to mitigate opioid‐related harm and improve patient outcomes.

COVID-19 and End of Life in a Quaternary Australian Hospital: Referral for Palliative Care Consultation.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic resulted in complex physical and psychosocial symptom burden at end of life. The benefit of specialist palliative care input in other disease states has been established, however, there is little evidence on referral patterns to these services in patients dying from COVID-19. This retrospective audit investigated the referral patterns for patients who died from COVID-19 at a quaternary hospital in South Australia (the Royal Adelaide Hospital) over a six-month period in 2022, and whether demographic features or COVID-19 specific factors had an impact on whether these patients received specialist palliative care services (PCS). The second aim was to identify prescription patterns for patients in the last 24 hours of life, and whether this was impacted by referral. Data were obtained from electronic medical records and analyzed using binary logistic regressions for referral to PCS versus no referral based on various predictors. There was no significant difference comparing patient demographics or COVID-19 specific factors with referral to PCS. There was statistical significance between patients who received referral to PCS and those who had a higher oral morphine equivalent daily dose (OMEDD) in the 24 hours before death, as well as the presence of a continuous subcutaneous infusion. Although the cause of this relationship is undetermined, it may represent the prescription patterns of the palliative care physicians during consultation or potentially higher symptom burden prompting referral. There was also a higher proportion of patients who received hydromorphone compared with other opioids, though the OMEDD was consistent with other published literature.

Intrathecal cervical analgesia for cancer pain: a 12-year follow-up study in a comprehensive cancer center

BackgroundIntrathecal analgesia plays a key role for patients suffering refractory cancer pain. Nevertheless, intrathecal drug delivery systems (IDDS), requiring a cervical catheter tip implantation, have been poorly described in medical...

Impact of Short-Course Palliative Radiation Therapy on Pancreatic Cancer-Related Pain: Prospective Phase 2 Nonrandomized PAINPANC Trial

Clinical evidence is limited regarding palliative radiation therapy for relieving pancreatic cancer-related pain. We prospectively investigated pain response after short-course palliative radiation therapy in patients with moderate-to-severe pancreatic cancer-related pain. In this prospective phase 2 single center nonrandomized trial, 30 patients with moderate-to-severe pain (5-10, on a 0-10 scale) of pancreatic cancer refractory to pain medication, were treated with a short-course palliative radiation therapy; 24 Gy in 3 weekly fractions (2015-2018). Primary endpoint was defined as a clinically relevant average decrease of ≥2 points in pain severity, compared with baseline, within 7 weeks after the start of treatment. Secondary endpoint was global quality of life (QoL), with a clinically relevant increase of 5 to 10 points (0-100 scale). Pain severity reduction and QoL were assessed 9 times using the Brief Pain Inventory and European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-C15-PAL, respectively. Both outcomes were analyzed using joint modeling. In addition, acute toxicity based on clinician reporting and overall survival (OS) were assessed. Overall, 29 of 30 patients (96.7%) received palliative radiation therapy. At baseline, the median oral morphine equivalent daily dose was 129.5 mg (range, 20.0-540.0 mg), which decreased to 75.0 mg (range, 15.0-360.0 mg) after radiation (P=.021). Pain decreased on average 3.15 points from baseline to 7 weeks (one-sided P=.045). Patients reported a clinically relevant mean pain severity reduction from 5.9 to 3.8 points (P=.011) during the first 3 weeks, which further decreased to 3.2 until week 11, ending at 3.4 (P=.006) in week 21 after the first radiation therapy fraction. Global QoL significantly improved from 50.5 to 60.8 during the follow-up period (P=.001). Grade 3 acute toxicity occurred in 3 patients and no grade 4 to 5 toxicity was observed. Median OS was 11.8 weeks, with a 13.3% 1-year actuarial OS rate. Short-course palliative radiation therapy for pancreatic cancer-related pain was associated with rapid, clinically relevant reduction in pain severity, and clinically relevant improvement in global QoL, with mostly mild toxicity.

Pharmacist ambulatory pain services for a chronic non‐cancer pain clinic: a descriptive study

AbstractBackgroundPatients presenting to specialist pain clinics are often prescribed complex and high‐risk analgesic regimens. In this setting, pharmacists can help identify at risk patients and provide valuable clinical input to improve patient outcomes.AimTo evaluate the role of a clinical pharmacist in improving the triage, assessment and management of patients presenting to ambulatory pain clinics.MethodThis descriptive study enrolled patients from two chronic noncancer pain clinics from July to December 2021. A new clinical pharmacist service was devised, which operated as telehealth one day per week. The pharmacist was responsible for accepting referrals, triaging based on clinic criteria and updating them with prescription risk factors, in line with SafeScript's traffic light system. Pharmacist clinical services included completion of medication histories, drug dose interventions and patient education. This project received departmental ethical approval from the Eastern Health Office of Research and Ethics prior to commencement (Approval No: QA21‐068).ResultsThe pharmacist assessed 253 patients and identified prescription risk factors for 68 patients; of which 11 (16%) had received opioids from ≥4 prescribers, 10 (15%) were issued a monitored prescription from ≥4 pharmacies, seven (10%) were on high‐risk drug combinations, 25 (37%) had an Oral Morphine Equivalent Daily Dose (OMEDD) of 50–100 mg, and 26 (38%) with OMEDD &gt;100 mg. The pharmacist completed 67 medication histories and provided 22 accepted drug intervention recommendations to clinic physicians, including seven recommendations for dose adjustments, six to cease a medicine and nine to start a new medicine.ConclusionThe pharmacist incorporated SafeScript in the clinics' triage processes and provided valuable clinical interventions complementing the care provided by the pain physicians and the allied health staff.

Changes in opioid and other analgesic prescribing following voluntary and mandatory prescription drug monitoring program implementation: A time series analysis of early outcomes.

Australian prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) provide information about a patient's recent medication history for controlled drugs at the point of prescribing and dispensing. Despite their increasing use, the evidence for PDMPs is mixed, and is almost exclusively from the United States. This study examined the impact of PDMP implementation on opioid prescribing among general practitioners in Victoria, Australia. We examined data on analgesic prescribing using electronic records of 464 medical practices in the Australian state of Victoria between 01/04/2017 and 31/12/ 2020. We used interrupted time series analyses, to examine immediate and longer-term trends in medication prescribing following voluntary (from April 2019) and mandatory PDMP implementation (from April 2020). We examined changes in three outcomes (i) 'high' opioid dose (50-100mg oral morphine equivalent daily dose (OMEDD) and over 100mg (OMEDD) prescribing (ii) prescribing of high-risk medication combinations (opioids with either benzodiazepines or pregabalin), and (iii) initiation of non-controlled pain medications (tricyclic antidepressants, pregabalin and tramadol). We found no effect of voluntary or mandatory PDMP implementation on 'high-dose' opioid prescribing with reductions only seen in those prescribed <20mg OMEDD (i.e., the lowest dose category). Co-prescribing of opioids with benzodiazepines (additional 11.87 [95%CI 2.04 to 21.67] patients/10,000 and pregabalin (additional 3.54 [95% CI 0.82 to 6.26] patients/10,000 increased following mandatory PDMP implementation among those prescribed opioids. In contrast to trends of reduced initiation prior to PDMP implementation, we found increased new initiation of non-monitored medications following PDMP implementation (e.g., an immediate increase of 2.32 [95%CI 0.02 to 4.54], patients/10,000 received pregabalin and 3.06 [95%CI 0.54 to 5.5] patients/10,000 received tricyclic antidepressants after mandatory PDMP implementation), and increased tramadol initiation during the voluntary PDMP period (an increase of 11.26 [95%CI: 5.84, 16.67] patients /10,000). PDMP implementation did not appear to reduce prescribing of high opioid doses or high-risk combinations. Increased initiation of tricyclic antidepressants, pregabalin and tramadol may indicate a possible unintended effect.

Does cancer type and adjuvant analgesic prescribing influence opioid dose?-a retrospective cross-sectional study.

Opioids are the backbone of cancer pain management. Minimal evidence exists examining the relationship between cancer type and opioid dose. Similarly, the use of adjuvant analgesics and its impact within an inpatient cancer setting is understudied. This study examined the influence of cancer type upon opioid dose, measured by oral morphine equivalent daily dose (oMEDD). The effect of adjuvant analgesics on patient oMEDD was also examined. This retrospective cross-sectional study examined records of 520 patients admitted to Royal Melbourne Hospital or Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre between 2016 and 2018 with advanced cancer. Number and dose of both opioid and adjuvant analgesics were collected along with demographic and cancer data. Comparisons of median oMEDD by cancer type [analysis of variance (ANOVA), non-parametric t-tests] and adjuvant analgesics (Kruskal-Wallis test) were performed. There were no statistically significant differences in oMEDD between the 12 cancer types (P=0.83; n=215). Patients co-prescribed pregabalin (n=102) and paracetamol (n=73) as adjuvant analgesics were on significantly higher daily oMEDD [60 mg (P=0.015), 90 mg (P<0.001), respectively]. Opioid dose did not differ significantly between cancer types. The observed use of adjuvant analgesics coincided with significantly higher oMEDD prescription which may relate to complex pain seen in this cohort of inpatients in a quarternary cancer centre. Future research should focus on pain type and aetiology, and pain scores in different cancer pain syndromes to determine the net effect of opioids and adjuvants in cancer pain prescribing.

The Edmonton Classification System for Cancer Pain in Patients with Bone Metastasis: a descriptive cohort study

PurposeWe describe the prevalence of the Edmonton Classification System for Cancer Pain (ECS-CP) features in patients with bone metastasis and cancer-induced bone pain (CIBP) and the relationship between ECS-CP features, pain intensity, and opioid consumption.MethodsWe assessed ECS-CP features and recoded pain mechanisms and opioid use in adult patients with bone metastasis. Validated measures were used to assess pain intensity, incident pain, psychological distress, addictive behavior, and cognition.ResultsAmong 147 eligible patients, 95.2% completed the assessment. Mean participant age was 73.2 years, the majority female (52.1%) with breast cancer occurring most commonly (25.7%). One or more ECS-CP features were present in 96.4% and CIBP in 75.7% of patients. The median average and worst pain scores were 3 and 6, respectively. Neuropathic pain was the most prevalent pain mechanism (45.0%) and was associated with breakthrough pain frequency (p=0.014). Three-quarters had incident pain, which was strongly associated with a higher average and worst pain scores (3.5 and 7, p<0.001 for both), background oral morphine equivalent daily dose (26.7mg, p=0.005), and frequency of daily breakthrough analgesia (1.7 doses/day, p=0.007). Psychological distress (n=90, 64.3%) was associated with a significantly higher average pain score (4, p=0.009) and a slightly higher worst pain score (7, p=0.054). Addictive behaviour and cognitive dysfunction were relatively uncommon (18.6% and 12.9%, respectively).ConclusionThere is a need to promote standardized assessment and classification of pain syndromes such as CIBP. The ECS-CP may allow us to consider CIBP in a systematic manner and develop personalized pain interventions appropriate to the pain profile.Trial registrationRetrospectively registered in ANZCTR ACTRN12622000853741 (16/06/2022)

Patient-targeted interventions for opioid deprescribing: An overview of systematic reviews.

Deprescribing (reduction or cessation) of prescribed opioids can be challenging for both patients and healthcare professionals. To synthesize and evaluate evidence from systematic reviews examining the effectiveness and outcomes of patient-targeted opioid deprescribing interventions for all types of pain. Systematic searches were conducted in five databases with results screened against predetermined inclusion/exclusion criteria. Primary outcomes were (i) reduction in opioid dose, reported as change in oral Morphine Equivalent Daily Dose (oMEDD) and (ii) success of opioid deprescribing, reported as the proportion of the sample for which opioid use declined. Secondary outcomes included pain severity, physical function, quality of life and adverse events. The certainty of evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Twelve reviews were eligible for inclusion. Interventions were heterogeneous in nature and included pharmacological (n = 4), physical (n = 3), procedural (n = 3), psychological or behavioural (n = 3) and mixed (n = 5) interventions. Multidisciplinary care programmes appeared to be the most effective intervention for opioid deprescribing; however, the certainty of evidence was low, with significant variability in opioid reduction across interventions. Evidence is too uncertain to draw firm conclusions about specific populations who may derive the greatest benefit from opioid deprescribing, warranting further investigation.

Do Patient Demographics and Performance Status Influence Opioid Dose in Cancer Pain?

Context: There is limited evidence on the role of objective parameters in influencing analgesic use in cancer pain management.Objective: To investigate the significance of objective parameters (age, male/female and performance status) in influencing opioid dose. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional audit of adult inpatients with metastatic cancer at a major cancer centre from 1 January 2016 to 31 December 2018, who were prescribed slow release opioids for cancer pain on discharge. Main outcome measures were demographics (age, male/female and performance status), oral morphine equivalent daily dose (oMEDD) and adjuvant analgesic use. Results: Of the 7,747 eligible records, 215 patient records fulfilled inclusion criteria. Older patients (≥75years) received half of the median oMEDD dose (30mg) compared to their youngest counterparts (60mg oMEDD in age ≤50years) (P = .003). No significant differences were observed between oMEDD and male/female and performance status. Conclusion: Older patients are prescribed half the opioid dose compared to their younger counterparts. This highlights the importance of vigilance in opioid prescribing in the elderly in order to balance side effects with under treatment. Although no other significant relationships were observed, future studies comparing objective patient parameters with opioid prescription may uncover other at risk populations.

Factors associated with persistent opioid use 6–12 months after primary total knee arthroplasty

Persistent pain following knee arthroplasty occurs in up to 20% of patients and may require ongoing analgesia, including extended opioid administration. A comprehensive secondary analysis was performed from results of a study that considered persistent postoperative pain in 242 patients who underwent unilateral knee arthroplasty using a standardised enhanced recovery programme. Opioid prescribing for 12 months before and 12 months after surgery was evaluated and converted to oral morphine equivalents. Demographic, functional, psychological and pain questionnaires were completed along with quantitative sensory testing and genetic analysis. Forty-nine percent of patients had at least one opioid prescription in the 12 months before surgery. Opioid prescriptions were filled in 93% of patients from discharge to 3 months and in 27% of patients ≥6 months after surgery. Persistent opioid use ≥6 months after surgery was strongly associated with pre-operative opioid use (RR 3.2, p < 0.001 (95%CI 1.9-5.4)). The median (IQR [range]) oral morphine equivalent daily dose was 3.6 (0.9-10.5 [0-100.0]) mg pre-operatively, 35.0 (22.5-52.5 [4.6-180.0]) mg in hospital, 12.8 (5.1-24.8 [0-57.9]) mg from discharge to 3 months and 5.9 (4.5-12.0 [0-44.5]) mg at ≥6 months following surgery. Predictors of increased daily oral morphine equivalent ≥6 months after surgery included increased average daily oral morphine equivalent dose compared with previous values (lag), increased body mass index and three or more comorbid pain sites. Persistent opioid use was not associated with the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain (RR 1.003, p = 0.655, 95%CI 0.65-1.002) or WOMAC function (RR 1.001, p = 0.99, 95%CI 0.99-1.03) outcomes 6 months after surgery. There was no association between persistent opioid use and pre-operative quantitative sensory testing results or psychological distress. Pre-operatively, patients with a higher body mass index, more comorbid pain sites and those who had filled an opioid prescription in the last 12 months, were at increased risk of persistent opioid use and a higher oral morphine equivalent daily dose ≥ 6 months after surgery. Strategies need to be developed to limit dose and duration of persistent opioid use in patients following knee arthroplasty surgery.

Use of clonidine in the treatment of Irukandji syndrome: A 4-year retrospective cohort study on safety, efficacy and clinical utility.

Irukandji syndrome (IS) is an extremely painful condition that causes a significant catecholamine surge and sympathetic autonomic response related to the envenomation from certain types of jellyfish. Current management involves intravenous fluids, magnesium sulphate and large doses of opioids for symptom control. Clonidine, a centrally acting alpha-2 agonist, is often used as an analgesic adjunct to reduce opioid requirements in acute pain. The present study explores the safety and efficacy of clonidine in reducing opioid requirements in IS. All patients diagnosed with IS at Cairns Hospital between 1 March 2016 and 30 April 2020, and participants from the Magnesium in Irukandji Study Trial, were included in this retrospective study (n= 114). Cases were separated into two groups depending on whether or not they received clonidine, and subsequently analysed according to pre- and post-intervention opioid requirements, clonidine dose administered and adverse effects. Notably, 39 patients with IS received ≥1 mcg/kg clonidine and the remaining 75 did not. There was no difference in oral morphine equivalent daily dose (oMEDD) between groups before clonidine administration; however, there was a significant reduction in oMEDD required after patients received clonidine (26.1 mg; 95% CI 4.6-47.7) compared with those who did not (66.6 mg; 95% CI 56.9-86.1) (F= 8.722, df= 1 × 224, P= 0.003). One episode of hypotension occurred following the intervention. Patients with IS who received clonidine required significantly lower opioid requirements than those who did not receive clonidine. Clonidine was safe to administer and should be considered early when treating IS. The optimal clonidine dose remains unclear and requires prospective studies to validate our findings.

Use of a buprenorphine-based pain management protocol is associated with reduced opioid requirements and pain on swallowing in oral mucositis: a retrospective cohort study.

The aim of this study is to ascertain the analgesic efficacy and total oral morphine equivalent daily dose (OMEDD) effect of a buprenorphine-based analgesic protocol in the treatment of severe Oral Mucositis (OM). This is a retrospective cohort study. This study was done in a single Quaternary Referral Centre, Haematology Unit. Fifty-four stem cell transplant patients suffering at least grade 3 oral mucositis (OM), 24 prior to [Pr-I] and 30 subsequent to [Po-I] a buprenorphine-based OM analgesic protocol. We analysed data from the above subjects with the primary outcome measure of difference in total OMEDDs from all opioid types and administration routes, and secondary outcome measures of area under the curve (AUC) of 11-point Numerical Rating Scale (NRS-11) pain assessments, sedation scores and respiratory rate. Post-protocol patients' total OMEDD requirements were significantly reduced [Pr-I: 1961 (1365)mg; Po-I: 928 (625)mg, p = 0.02], as were total NRS-11:hours AUC on swallowing [Pr-I: 54(24) score-hours; Po-I: 41(18) score-hours, p < 0.001]. There were no significant differences in objective measures of OM severity between groups (Number of Grade 3 or 4 OM severity assessments [mean (SD)] Pr-I: 5 (6.2); Po-I: 7 (5.1) or number of days Neutrophil count 0.0 or 0.1 × 109/L; Pr-I: 13 (5.4); Po-I: 15 (4.7)). 5 Pr-I and 4 Po-I patients required ketamine infusions, with 1 Pr-I patient also requiring IV lignocaine. Use of Buprenorphine via transdermal, sublingual and intravenous Patient Controlled Analgesia (PCA) delivery as part of an analgesic protocol for severe post stem cell transplant oral mucositis in adult patients appears to significantly reduce opioid requirements and pain on swallowing. Further randomised prospective work is required to confirm these associations.

Complete opioid transition to sublingual Buprenorphine after abdominal surgery is associated with significant reductions in opioid requirements, but not reduction in hospital length of stay: a retrospective cohort study

BackgroundThe use of sublingual buprenorphine (SLBup) for acute pain after major abdominal surgery may offer the potential advantages of unique analgesic properties and more reliable absorption during resolving ileus. We hypothesized that complete opioid transition to SLBup rather than oral oxycodone (OOxy) in the early postoperative period after major abdominal surgery would reduce hospital length of stay, and acute pain and total OMEDD (Oral Morphine Equivalent Daily Dose) requirements in the first 24 h from post-parenteral opioid transition.MethodsWe reviewed 146 patients who had undergone elective and emergency abdominal surgery under our quaternary referral centre’s Upper Gastro-Intestinal and Colo-Rectal Surgical Units 6 months before and after the introduction of complete postoperative transition to sublingual buprenorphine, rather than oral oxycodone, in July 2017. Our primary endpoint was 24-hourly post-transition OMEDDs; secondary endpoints were 24-hourly post-transition Mean NRS-11 pain scores on movement (POM) and length of hospital stay (LOS). Univariate analysis and linear multivariate regression analyses were used to quantify effect size and identify surgical, patient & other analgesic factors associated with these outcome measures.ResultsPatients transitioning to SLBup had reduced 24-hourly post-transition OMEDD requirements on postoperative day 2 (POD) (26 mg less, p = 0.04) and NRS-11 POM at POD1 (0.7 NRS-11 units less, p = 0.01). When adjusting for patient, surgical and special analgesic factors, SLBup was associated with a similar reduction in OMEDDs (Unstandardised beta-coefficient -26 mg, p = 0.0001), but not NRS-11 POM (p = 0.47) or hospital LOS (p = 0.16).ConclusionsOur change of practice from use of OOxy to SLBup as primary transition opioid from patient-controlled analgesia delivered full opioid agonists was associated with a clinically significant decrease in 24-hourly post-parenteral opioid transition OMEDDs and improved NRS-11 POM, but without an association with hospital LOS after major abdominal surgery. Further prospective randomized work is required to confirm these observed associations and impact on other important patient-centred outcomes.

Pharmacokinetics, Safety, and Tolerability of a Medicinal Cannabis Formulation in Patients with Chronic Non-cancer Pain on Long-Term High Dose Opioid Analgesia: A Pilot Study.

IntroductionThis phase I open-label study examined pharmacokinetics, safety, and tolerability of escalating doses of a novel combination cannabinoid medication (1:1 tetrahydrocannabinol [THC]/cannabidiol [CBD]) in patients with chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) on high dose opioid analgesia.MethodsNine people with CNCP and oral morphine equivalent daily dose of 60 mg or higher were recruited. Blood concentrations of THC, 11-hydroxytetrahydrocannabinol (OH-THC), 11-nor-9-carboxy-tetrahydrocannabinol (COOH-THC), and CBD were assayed weekly. Concentrations were measured after a single dose of 2.5 mg THC/2.5 mg CBD on day 1, and daily escalating doses up to a single dose of 12.5 mg THC/12.5 mg CBD on day 29. Follow-up was on day 36 after a 7-day washout. Secondary outcome data encompassed pain, mood, and sleep parameters.ResultsThe parent compounds THC, and CBD, and metabolites OH-THC and COOH-THC were detected at most time points. In general, the concentration of all analytes increased until 2 h post-administration, decreasing to approximately pre-dose concentrations by 8 h. There was considerable inter- and intra-individual variability. The study medication was well tolerated. Eight participants reported at least one adverse event (AE), with a total of 62 AEs; most common were euphoric mood, headache, and agitation, none classified as severe. There was no significant change to pain severity self-ratings, nor use of pain medications. Improvements in pain interference scores, mood, and some sleep parameters were observed.ConclusionThe THC/CBD formulation was tolerated well in a group of patients with CNCP. Between-participant variability supports personalized dosing and “start low–go slow” titration. To validate and quantify improvements in secondary efficacy outcomes a randomized placebo-controlled study is needed.Trial RegistrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Register (CT-2019-CTN-01224-1).Supplementary InformationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40122-021-00344-y.

The impact and value of a pharmacist within a persistent pain management service

AbstractA model of a pharmacist‐led consultation clinic within a Persistent Pain Management Service (PPMS) has recently been implemented to improve accessibility to medication review, promote opioid stewardship and reduce high‐risk medication‐taking behaviours. This audit aims to determine the impact of a pharmacist on opioid de‐escalation and the perceived value of pharmacist interventions. This audit was conducted at an outpatient PPMS between 30/10/19 and 25/3/20. Pharmacist interventions and deprescribing plans from 1:1 consultation with patients were communicated in writing to general practitioners (GPs) for actioning. Opioid consumption was quantified using oral morphine equivalent daily dose (oMEDD). Self‐rated patient, GP and PPMS staff questionnaires were used to assess perception of value and impact of pharmacist service. Thirty‐five patients were included. Mean oMEDD reduced from 86.2mg to 73.4mg (p &lt; 0.0001) after a mean of 64 days. Pharmacist consultation resulted in improved patient understanding of medication roles in chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) (self‐rated score: 6.4 increased to 8.0 on a 10‐point scale, p &lt; 0.0001) and improved confidence to safely administer medications (7.2 increased to 8.7, p &lt; 0.0001). There was 100% patient satisfaction. GP questionnaire data (n = 18) indicated 90% of GPs plan to implement at least one recommendation. GP’s indicated recommendations were valuable, practical and clear (rated 4.1, 4.1 &amp; 4.4, respectively, on a 5‐point scale). Pharmacist service was associated with reduced opioid intake and improved patient understanding regarding roles and harms of medications in CNCP. Pharmacist interventions were routinely implemented and valued by GPs.

Pharmacist interventions in an outpatient pain clinic at a Veterans Affairs Medical Center

AbstractPurposeClinical pharmacist practitioners (CPPs) ensure safe and evidence‐based pharmacotherapy practices. However, there is little information to date characterizing the impact of pain CPP interventions on patient outcomes within a CPP‐managed outpatient chronic and postoperative pain clinic. The primary objective of this study was to classify and quantify the number of pain CPP interventions in the outpatient pain clinic at the West Palm Beach Veteran Affairs Medical Center (WPB VAMC). The secondary objective assessed general patient outcomes associated with pain pharmacotherapy management by a CPP.SummaryA retrospective chart review of pain CPP encounters was utilized to identify interventions over a 12‐month period. A total of 805 pain management encounters with a total of 1993 interventions were recorded by pain CPPs during that time. Descriptive statistics and sample size calculations were used to summarize and evaluate results. Overall, 55% of interventions were pharmacological, 45% were nonpharmacological interventions, and 5% were referrals to other specialty providers. For the secondary objective (n = 107), patients in the pain clinic on opioid therapy experienced an average oral morphine equivalent daily dose (MEDD) reduction of 21 mg without any identified suicide or overdose events and achieved on average 45% of their SMART goals by their last visit. In patients with baseline pain, enjoyment of life, and general activity (PEG) scores (n = 69), there were 43% of patients with improved PEG scores at their last visit in which 14% (10/69) experienced a clinically meaningful improvement in PEG scores.ConclusionPain CPPs demonstrated a reduction in overall MEDDs safely while following the biopsychosocial approach to pain management by incorporating and referring for nonpharmacological interventions as well as completing opioid risk mitigation. Additional studies are needed to better characterize pain CPP impact on patient outcomes.

Sublingual buprenorphine for acute postoperative cancer pain: a retrospective study

AbstractBackgroundSublingual buprenorphine is an atypical opioid that potentially has a wider safety profile than conventional opioids. However, there is a paucity of literature concerning its role in acute postoperative pain.AimTo describe the use of sublingual buprenorphine including efficacy and safety for the management of acute postoperative pain at a comprehensive cancer centre.MethodA retrospective study of sublingual buprenorphine analgesia after cancer surgery between 1 June 2015 to 31 October 2016. Outcome measures included pain scores (Verbal Numerical Rating Scale), dosage, oral morphine equivalent daily dose before treatment, adverse events, co‐analgesia, duration of treatment and length of stay. Patients were categorised as responders or non‐responders based on their response. Ethics approved by the Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre Expedited Ethics Review Committee (approval no. 18/59R).ResultsSixty‐six patients were included with a mean age of 62.8 years and 53% were male. Of those, 86.3% (55/66) were categorised as responders to sublingual buprenorphine treatment. Pain scores were significantly lower in responders compared to non‐responders after treatment 4.2 versus 7.3 (p &lt; 0.05). Sublingual buprenorphine was well tolerated with a low adverse event frequency (10.6%), with nausea/vomiting reported most commonly. All patients were prescribed at least one co‐analgesic. The mean duration of treatment was 6.2 days and there was no difference in length of stay between groups.ConclusionAfter cancer surgery, patients can benefit from sublingual buprenorphine analgesia due to its safe adverse event profile and overall self‐reported efficacy. Further research is recommended to account for confounders including study in a larger cohort.