Opioid Tapering Practices—Time for Reconsideration?

JAMA ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 326 (5) ◽  
pp. 388
Author(s):  
Marc Larochelle ◽  
Pooja A. Lagisetty ◽  
Amy S. B. Bohnert
Keyword(s):  
2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Jason W. Busse ◽  
Joyce Douglas ◽  
Tara S. Chauhan ◽  
Bilal Kobeissi ◽  
Jeff Blackmer

Background. Physician adherence to guideline recommendations for the use of opioids to manage chronic pain is often limited. Objective. In February 2018, we administered a 28-item online survey to explore perceptions of the 2017 Canadian guideline for opioid therapy and chronic noncancer pain and if physicians had altered practices in response to recommendations. Results. We invited 34,322 Canadian physicians to complete our survey, and 1,128 responded for a response rate of 3%; 687 respondents indicated they prescribed opioids for noncancer pain and answered survey questions about the guideline and their practice. Almost all were aware of the guideline, 94% had read the document, and 89% endorsed the clarity as good or excellent. The majority (86%) felt the guideline was feasible to implement, but 66% highlighted resistance by patients, and 63% the lack of access to effective nonopioid treatment as barriers. Thirty-six percent of respondents mistakenly believed the guideline recommended mandatory tapering for patients using high-dose opioid therapy (≥90 mg morphine equivalent per day), and 58% felt they would benefit from support for opioid tapering. Seventy percent of respondents had changed practices to align with guideline recommendations, with 51% engaging some high-dose patients in opioid tapering and 43% reducing the number of new opioid starts. Conclusion. There was high awareness of the 2017 Canadian opioid guideline among respondents, and preliminary evidence that recommendations have changed practice to better align with the evidence. Ongoing education is required to avoid the misunderstanding that opioid tapering is mandatory, and research to identify effective strategies to manage chronic noncancer pain is urgently needed.


2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 167-173 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kehua Zhou ◽  
Peng Jia ◽  
Swati Bhargava ◽  
Yong Zhang ◽  
Taslima Reza ◽  
...  

AbstractBackground and aimsOpioid use disorder (OUD) refers to a maladaptive pattern of opioid use leading to clinically significant impairment or distress. OUD causes, and vice versa, misuses and abuse of opioid medications. Clinicians face daily challenges to treat patients with prescription opioid use disorder. An evidence-based management for people who are already addicted to opioids has been identified as the national priority in the US; however, options are limited in clinical practices. In this study, we aimed to explore the success rate and important adjuvant medications in the medication assisted treatment with temporary use of methadone for opioid discontinuation in patients with prescription OUD.MethodsThis is a retrospective chart review performed at a private physician office for physical medicine and rehabilitation. We reviewed all medical records dated between December 1st, 2011 and August 30th, 2016. The initial evaluation of the included patients (N =140) was completed between December 1st, 2011 and December 31st, 2014. They all have concumittant prescription OUD and chronic non-cancer pain. The patients (87 female and 53 male) were 46.7 ± 12.7 years old, and had a history of opioid use of 7.7 ±6.1 years. All patients received the comprehensive opioid taper treatments (including interventional pain management techniques, psychotherapy, acupuncture, physical modalities and exercises, and adjuvant medications) on top of the medication assisted treatment using methadone (transient use). Opioid tapering was considered successful when no opioid medication was used in the last patient visit.ResultsThe 140 patients had pain of 9.6 ± 8.4 years with 8/10 intensity before treatment which decreased after treatment in all comparisons (p < 0.001 for all). Opioids were successfully tapered off in 39 (27.9%) patients after 6.6 ±6.7 visits over 8.8 ±7.2 months; these patients maintained opioid abstinence over 14.3 ± 13.0 months with regular office visits. Among the 101 patients with unsuccessful opioid tapering, 13 patients only visited the outpatient clinic once. Significant differences were found between patients with and without successful opioid tapering in treatment duration, number of clinic visits, the use of mirtazepine, bupropion, topiramate, and trigger point injections with the univariate analyses. The use of mirtazepine (OR, 3.75; 95% CI, 1.48–9.49), topiramate (OR, 5.61; 95% CI, 1.91–16.48), or bupropion (OR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.08–5.81) was significantly associated with successful opioid tapering. The associations remain significant for mirtazepine and topiramate (not bupropion) in different adjusted models.ConclusionsWith comprehensive treatments, 27.9% of patients had successful opioid tapering with opioid abstinence for over a year. The use of mirtazepine, topiramate, or likely bupropion was associated with successful opioid tapering in the medication assisted treatment with temporary use of methadone. Opioid tapering may be a practical option and should be considered for managing prescription OUD.ImplicationsFor patients with OUD, indefinite opioid maintenance treatment may not be necessary. Considering the ethical values of autonomy, nonmaleficence, and beneficence, clinicians should provide patients with OUD the option of opioid tapering.


2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (11) ◽  
pp. 33-34
Author(s):  
Loren Bonner
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Daniel M. Doleys ◽  
Nicholas D. Doleys

The pendulum has swung; in this case, it may be a double pendulum. The double pendulum is a pendulum hanging from a pendulum. It is a simple physical system used in physics to demonstrate mathematical chaos. When the motion of its tip is monitored, it appears very predictable at the outset, but soon reveals a very chaotic and unpredictable pattern. It is very difficult to know where the tip of the double pendulum will be at any given time in the future. This seems to describe the course of the use of opioids, especially for the treatment of chronic pain. Once, all but ignored, then heralded, and then demonized. At every step of the way, pundits will argue the incompleteness, absence, or misinterpretation of existing data. It is important to understand the psychological environment is which the opioid tapering movement occurs and to carefully consider the process in the context of the individual patient. Simply instituting another set of presumptive evidence-based guidelines could have unforeseen, and potentially tragic, consequences for the patient.


2018 ◽  
Vol 218 (1) ◽  
pp. S379-S380
Author(s):  
Jamie L. Morgan ◽  
Paula Turicchi ◽  
Robert D. Stewart ◽  
Jodi S. Dashe ◽  
Jeanne S. Sheffield ◽  
...  

2009 ◽  
Vol 108 (1) ◽  
pp. 308-315 ◽  
Author(s):  
W Michael Hooten ◽  
Cynthia O. Townsend ◽  
Barbara K. Bruce ◽  
David O. Warner

2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 59 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deborah Fisher, PhD, RN, PPCNP-BC ◽  
Suzanne W. Ameringer, PhD, RN

Objective: The purpose of this study was to describe the current opioid tapering practice.Design: Cross-sectional, online, survey research.Participants: Pediatric healthcare providers from a national sample of practicing nurse practitioners, physician assistants, and physicians who participate in five different pediatric pain and/or palliative care list serves.Results: One hundred four participants responded to the survey. The respondents were predominantly physicians (n = 58, 62 percent). The majority of respondents worked in an academic children's medical center (n = 50, 52 percent). The average number of years in pediatric practice was 16 (mean = 16.33, range of 0-45 years). Of the 104 respondents, only 22 (27 percent) had a written protocol for opioid tapering. Use of expert consultants such as pharmacists or pediatric pain management teams varied. The majority of respondents (n = 46, 44 percent) seldom or never consult a pharmacist. Only 22 percent (n = 17) almost always or always consult a pediatric pain team. There was a wide range of personal tapering rate preferences. Conclusions: This study provided a baseline assessment of pediatric opioid tapering practices by pediatric healthcare providers. Results revealed a marked variation in practice patterns that may indicate deficits in the assessment and management of opioid withdrawal in children. The need for the development of assessment-based opioid tapering guidelines for the pediatric population is long overdue.


2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 345-348 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kehua Zhou, MD, DPT, LAc ◽  
Leslie Frankish, BS ◽  
Gary G. Wang, MD, PhD

Opioid tapering may be necessary for patients on long-term opioids. Here, the authors presented a patient who had uncontrolled chronic musculoskeletal pain while on chronic methadone. Upon methadone tapering, the patient had been taking methadone for longer than six years and had severe methadone-related adverse effects. Using multidisciplinary interventions of patient education and counseling, physical interventions, and nonopioid medications, patient’s methadone was discontinued after longer than one year tapering with relatively good pain control. The tapering process highlights the importance of pain management during opioid tapering using multidisciplinary interventions to prevent and treat opioid withdrawal and pain relapses.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document