scholarly journals Association of Opioid Prescribing With Opioid Consumption After Surgery in Michigan

JAMA Surgery ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 154 (1) ◽  
pp. e184234 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryan Howard ◽  
Brian Fry ◽  
Vidhya Gunaseelan ◽  
Jay Lee ◽  
Jennifer Waljee ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Marie-Jacqueline Reisener ◽  
Alexander P. Hughes ◽  
Ichiro Okano ◽  
Jiaqi Zhu ◽  
Artine Arzani ◽  
...  

OBJECTIVE Opioid stewardship programs combine clinical, regulatory, and educational interventions to minimize inappropriate opioid use and prescribing for orthopedic and spine surgery. Most evaluations of stewardship programs quantify effects on prescriber behavior, whereas patient-relevant outcomes have been relatively neglected. The authors evaluated the impact of an opioid stewardship program on perioperative opioid consumption, prescribing, and related clinical outcomes after multilevel lumbar fusion. METHODS The study was based on a retrospective, quasi-experimental, pretest-posttest design in 268 adult patients who underwent multilevel lumbar fusion in 2016 (preimplementation, n = 141) or 2019 (postimplementation, n = 127). The primary outcome was in-hospital opioid consumption (morphine equivalent dose [MED], mg). Secondary outcomes included numeric rating scale pain scores (0–10), length of stay (LOS), incidence of opioid-induced side effects (gastrointestinal, nausea/vomiting, respiratory, sedation, cognitive), and preoperative and discharge prescribing. Outcomes were measured continuously during the hospital admission. Differences in outcomes between the epochs were assessed in bivariable (Wilcoxon signed-rank or Fisher’s exact tests) and multivariable (Wald’s chi-square test) analyses. RESULTS In bivariable analyses, there were significant decreases in preoperative opioid use (46% vs 28% of patients, p = 0.002), preoperative opioid prescribing (MED 30 mg [IQR 20–60 mg] vs 20 mg [IQR 11–39 mg], p = 0.003), in-hospital opioid consumption (MED 329 mg [IQR 188–575 mg] vs 199 mg [100–372 mg], p < 0.001), the incidence of any opioid-related side effect (62% vs 50%, p = 0.03), and discharge opioid prescribing (MED 90 mg [IQR 60–135 mg] vs 60 mg [IQR 45–80 mg], p < 0.0001) between 2016 and 2019. There were no significant differences in postanesthesia care unit pain scores (4 [IQR 3–6] vs 5 [IQR 3–6], p = 0.33), nursing floor pain scores (4 [IQR 3–5] vs 4 [IQR 3–5], p = 0.93), or total LOS (118 hours [IQR 81–173 hours] vs 103 hours [IQR 81–132 hours], p = 0.21). On multivariable analysis, the opioid stewardship program was significantly associated with decreased discharge prescribing (Wald’s chi square = 9.45, effect size −52.4, 95% confidence interval [CI] −86 to −19.0, p = 0.002). The number of lumbar levels fused had the strongest effect on total opioid consumption during the hospital stay (Wald’s chi square = 16.53, effect size = 539, 95% CI 279.1 to 799, p < 0.001), followed by preoperative opioid use (Wald’s chi square = 44.04, effect size = 5, 95% CI 4 to 7, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS A significant decrease in perioperative opioid prescribing, consumption, and opioid-related side effects was found after implementation of an opioid stewardship program. These gains were achieved without adverse effects on pain scores or LOS. These results suggest the major impact of opioid stewardship programs for spine surgery may be on changing prescriber behavior.


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (7_suppl6) ◽  
pp. 2325967120S0039
Author(s):  
Nikhil Mandava ◽  
Demetris Delos ◽  
Katherine Vadasdi ◽  
R. Greene ◽  
Marc Kowalsky ◽  
...  

Objectives: Opioid prescriptions following knee arthroscopy vary substantially, ranging from 15 to 60 opioid pills.[1-3] Expert panel guidelines recommend up to 30 pills for knee arthroscopy and 60 pills for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) using an autograft; however, these recommendations are based on consensus rather than evidence.[4] Currently, orthopaedic surgeons do not possess any evidence driven guidelines for opioid prescriptions following knee arthroscopy or ACLR. The purpose of this study was to record patients’ postoperative opioid requirement to develop evidence driven prescription guidelines for knee arthroscopy and ACLR. Tepolt FA, Bido J, Burgess S, Micheli LJ, Kocher MS. Opioid Overprescription After Knee Arthroscopy and Related Surgery in Adolescents and Young Adults. Arthroscopy. 2018;34(12):3236-3243. Gardner V, Gazzaniga D, Shepard M, et al. Monitoring Postoperative Opioid Use Following Simple Arthroscopic Meniscectomy: A Performance-Improvement Strategy for Prescribing Recommendations and Community Safety. JB JS Open Access. 2018;3(4):e0033. Wojahn RD, Bogunovic L, Brophy RH, et al. Opioid Consumption After Knee Arthroscopy. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2018;100(19):1629-1636. Stepan JG, Lovecchio FC, Premkumar A, et al. Development of an Institutional Opioid Prescriber Education Program and Opioid-Prescribing Guidelines: Impact on Prescribing Practices. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2019;101(1):5-13. Methods: This prospective multicenter observational study enrolled 50 subjects undergoing outpatient knee arthroscopy for meniscal repair, meniscectomy, or ACLR. Opioid prescriptions, refills, and subject demographics were recorded. All patients followed the same perioperative, multimodal analgesic regimen (Table 1). Subjects were provided a pain journal to record visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores and opioid consumption for one week postoperatively. No changes were made to existing prescribing habits, postoperative physical rehabilitation, or surgical methodology. State databases were reviewed for additional opioid prescriptions. Results: Subjects, on average, consumed 2.5 opioid pills (range 0 to 14 pills) with a median consumption of 0.5 pills after knee arthroscopy. Eighty six percent of subjects (N = 43) consumed ≤ 5 opioid pills and 50% of subjects (N = 25) chose not to consume opioids postoperatively. Ninety two percent of subjects (N = 46) discontinued opioid consumption by the 3rd postoperative day. Subjects specifically undergoing ACLR (N = 18) consumed an average of 41 OME (Figure 1). Subjects consumed only 30% of opioids leaving 2,196 OME (approximately 293 oxycodone 5mg) available for possible distribution or misuse. Conclusion: This study demonstrates that current expert panels recommend an excess of opioids following knee arthroscopy. In contrast to these expert panel guidelines, we suggest a maximum of 5 and 15 oxycodone 5mg pills for knee arthroscopy and ACLR respectively. This evidence driven guideline will greatly assist orthopaedic surgeons in their effort to combat opioid overprescription. [Table: see text][Figure: see text]


2016 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Asif M Ilyas

<p>In the United States of America, we are in the midst of a social pandemic, referred to as “The Opioid Epidemic.” This is a problem not unique to America, but because it plagues America it illustrates the problem’s multifactorial nature and also highlights that any country, regardless of affluence, can fall victim to this problem. The problem with opioid abuse is not a new one in America and can be traced at least as far back as the Civil War, where soldiers suffering from various war-related injuries were treated liberally with morphine resulting in widespread addiction, referred to at the time as “Soldier’s Disease.” However, despite growing awareness of the problem over time and despite several social and political initiatives to combat it, including establishment of both the Food and Drug Ad-ministration (FDA) and the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) that were charged with controlling opioid prescribing among other responsibilities and the late First Lady Nancy Reagan’s famous “Just Say No” campaign in the 1980’s, opioid abuse has persisted in America.</p><p>      Opioid abuse represents both abuse of prescribed opioids such as morphine, oxycodone, hydrocodone, codeine, etc; but also abuse of illegal opioids such as cocaine and heroin. The current epidemicis unique in that it draws heavily from abuse of prescription opioids. The modern “Opioid Epidemic”can be traced back to approximately the year 2000. At that time, hospital patients’ pain scored on a visual analog scale from 1 – 10 was designated the “fifth vital sign” after temperature, heart rate, blood pressure, and respiratory rate; warranting aggressive management. It is this singular event that a direct line can be drawn from when both patients began consuming more opioids and physicians began prescribing more. It was also at approximately this time, that the pharmaceutical industry came out with several long-acting opioids such as Oxycontin (Purdue Pharma – Stamford, Connecticut, USA). What resulted was a rising expectation by patients and society of aggressive and generous receipt of opioids and liberal prescribing by physicians. The result was an explosion of opioid prescriptions. Here are our current facts to consider.<sup>1</sup></p><p>-          American represents 5% of the world’s population but consumes 80% of the world’s opioids.</p><p>-          260 plus opioid prescriptions are written annually, 3 times more than in 1999.</p><p>-          1.9 million Americans are addicted to prescription opioids.</p><p>-          4 out of every 5 heroin users started their addiction with prescription opioids.</p><p>-          78 people die daily from an opioid-related over-dose.</p><p>      Fortunately, this has resulted in a pro-active response from both the American medical community and the political establishment. The American Attorney General, Dr. Vivek Murthy, recently took the unprecedented step to write a personal letter to all prescribing physicians in America engaging them to under-stand the problem, encouraging them to curb inconsiderate opioid prescribing, and recommended directing those patients with signs of addiction to receive early active treatment. Many states have also taken aggressive steps such as mandating opioid prescribing restrictions and requiring medical students and physicians to receive mandatory opioid prescriber training. Similarly, in our institution, we have studied our patients’ opioid consumption and physician prescribing habits. Within the Orthopaedic Surgery department, we noted that on average patients were consuming 8 opioid pills on average after upper extremity surgery, yet physicians were prescribing 25 opioid pills on average, resulting in an inadvertent 3 fold over-prescribing pat-tern.<sup>2</sup> The results of this study surprised us all and has led us to establish prescription guidelines and pre-scribe opioids post-operatively more discriminately.</p><p>      Pakistan is not immune to this problem. In some ways, it is more susceptible to it due to limitations in resources, greater poverty and illiteracy, and the active and ever increasing opioid production in Afghanistan making its way to Pakistan. A survey report published by the UN Office on Drugs and Crime in 2013 found that more that 6.7 million Pakistanis are estimated to have used opioid (including both heroin and opioids) in 2012 alone.<sup>3</sup> Although there is variability with consumption throughout the country, with Balochistan having the highest prevalence of users, all regions were involved. Punjab, due to its large share of the population, has the highest number of opioid abusers with 2.9 million. Moreover, approximately 80% of users in Punjab who inject opioids admit to sharing syringes regularly.</p><p>      Fortunately, there is much Pakistan can learn from America’s challenges with opioid abuse. These lessons include: avoiding the trap of aggressively treating pain under the guise of good patient care, active education of physicians and medical students on the risks of opioid addiction and learning best opioid prescribing habits, curbing the influence on the pharmaceutical industry on opioid consumption, and keeping pressure on public officials to fight illegal opioid entrance into the country. Ultimately, it will be the medical community, and in particular leaders like those at the King Edward Medical University, that will have to both face this problem and ultimately address it heads on.</p>


2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 225-233 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ujash Sheth ◽  
Mitesh Mehta ◽  
Fernando Huyke ◽  
Michael A. Terry ◽  
Vehniah K. Tjong

Context: The prescription of opioids after elective surgical procedures has been a contributing factor to the current opioid epidemic in North America. Objective: To examine the opioid prescribing practices and rates of opioid consumption among patients undergoing common sports medicine procedures. Data Sources: A systematic review of the electronic databases EMBASE, MEDLINE, and PubMed was performed from database inception to December 2018. Study Selection: Two investigators independently identified all studies reporting on postoperative opioid prescribing practices and consumption after arthroscopic shoulder, knee, or hip surgery. A total of 119 studies were reviewed, with 8 meeting eligibility criteria. Study Design: Systematic review. Level of Evidence: Level 4. Data Extraction: The quantity of opioids prescribed and used were converted to milligram morphine equivalents (MMEs) for standardized reporting. The quality of each eligible study was evaluated using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies. Results: A total of 8 studies including 816 patients with a mean age of 43.8 years were eligible for inclusion. A mean of 610, 197, and 613 MMEs were prescribed to patients after arthroscopic procedures of the shoulder, knee, and hip, respectively. At final follow-up, 31%, 34%, and 64% of the prescribed opioids provided after shoulder, knee, and hip arthroscopy, respectively, still remained. The majority of patients (64%) were unaware of the appropriate disposal methods for surplus medication. Patients undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair had the highest opioid consumption (471 MMEs), with 1 in 4 patients receiving a refill. Conclusion: Opioids are being overprescribed for arthroscopic procedures of the shoulder, knee, and hip, with more than one-third of prescribed opioids remaining postoperatively. The majority of patients are unaware of the appropriate disposal techniques for surplus opioids. Appropriate risk stratification tools and evidence-based recommendations regarding pain management strategies after arthroscopic procedures are needed to help curb the growing opioid crisis.


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (8) ◽  
pp. e047928
Author(s):  
Christopher W Shanahan ◽  
Olivia Reding ◽  
Inga Holmdahl ◽  
Julia Keosaian ◽  
Ziming Xuan ◽  
...  

ObjectivesTo prospectively characterise: (1) postoperative opioid analgesic prescribing practices; (2) experience of patients undergoing elective ambulatory surgeries and (3) impact of patient risk for medication misuse on postoperative pain management.DesignLongitudinal survey of patients 7 days before and 7–14 days after surgery.SettingAcademic urban safety-net hospital.Participants181 participants recruited, 18 surgeons, follow-up data from 149 participants (82% retention); 54% women; mean age: 49 years.InterventionsNone.Primary and secondary outcome measuresTotal morphine equivalent dose (MED) prescribed and consumed, percentage of unused opioids.ResultsSurgeons postoperatively prescribed a mean of 242 total MED per patient, equivalent to 32 oxycodone (5 mg) pills. Participants used a mean of 116 MEDs (48%), equivalent to 18 oxycodone (5 mg) pills (~145 mg of oxycodone remaining per patient). A 10-year increase in patient age was associated with 12 (95% CI (−2.05 to –0.35)) total MED fewer prescribed opioids. Each one-point increase in the preoperative Graded Chronic Pain Scale was associated with an 18 (6.84 to 29.60) total MED increase in opioid consumption, and 5% (−0.09% to –0.005%) fewer unused opioids. Prior opioid prescription was associated with a 55 (5.38 to –104.82) total MED increase in opioid consumption, and 19% (−0.35% to –0.02%) fewer unused opioids. High-risk drug use was associated with 9% (−0.19% to 0.002%) fewer unused opioids. Pain severity in previous 3 months, high-risk alcohol, use and prior opioid prescription were not associated with postoperative prescribing practices.ConclusionsParticipants with a preoperative history of chronic pain, prior opioid prescription, and high-risk drug use were more likely to consume higher amounts of opioid medications postoperatively. Additionally, surgeons did not incorporate key patient-level factors (eg, substance use, preoperative pain) into opioid prescribing practices. Opportunities to improve postoperative opioid prescribing include system changes among surgical specialties, and patient education and monitoring.


2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 491-499 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lene Jarlbaek

Abstract Background and aims The medical use of opioids in different countries is often subject to public concern and debate, frequently based on rough figures from prescription databases made for registration of consumption. However, public access to some of these databases allow for further exploration of the prescription data, which can be processed to increase knowledge and insight into national opioid prescribing-behavior. Denmark, Sweden and Norway are considered closely related with regard to health care and culture. So, this study aims to provide a more detailed picture of opioid prescribing and its changes in the three Scandinavian countries during 2006–2014, using public assessable prescription data. Methods Data on dispensed opioid prescriptions (ATC; N02A, and R05DA04) were downloaded from each country’s prescription-databases. The amounts of dispensed opioids were used as proxy for consumption or use of opioids. Potential differences between dispensed prescriptions and actual use cannot be drawn from these databases. Consumption-data were converted from defined daily doses (DDDs) to mg oral morphine equivalents (omeqs). Changes in the choice of opioid-types, consumption and number of users were presented using descriptive statistics and compared. Results Opioid users: during the whole period, Norway had the highest, and Denmark the lowest, number of opioid users/1,000 inhabitants. From 2006 to 2014 the numbers of users/1,000 inhabitants changed from 98 to 105 in Norway, from 66 to 75 in Denmark, and from 79 to 78 in Sweden. Opioid consumption/1,000 inhabitants: The results depended much on the unit of measurement. The differences between the countries in consumption/1,000 inhabitants were small when DDDs was used as unit, while using mg omeqs significant differences between the countries appeared. Denmark had a much higher consumption of omeqs per 1,000 inhabitants compared to Sweden and Norway. Opioid consumption/user: during the whole period, Norway had the lowest, and Denmark the highest consumption/user. In 2006, the annual average consumption/user was 1979, 3615, 6025 mg omeq/user in Norway, Sweden and Denmark, respectively. In 2014 the corresponding consumption was 2426, 3473, 6361 mg omeq/user. The preferred choices of opioid-types changed during the period in all three countries. The balance between use of weak or strong opioids showed more prominent changes in Norway and Sweden compared to Denmark. Conclusions This study has shown how public assessable opioid prescription data can provide insight in the doctors’ prescribing behavior, and how it might change over time. The amounts of dispensed opioids, opioid prescribing habits and changes were compared between the countries, and significant differences appeared. Within each country, the overall picture of opioid consumption appeared rather stable. Implications Studies like this can contribute to qualify the ongoing debates of use of opioids in different nations and to monitor effects of initiatives taken by health-care authorities and health-care policy-makers.


2020 ◽  
pp. bmjqs-2020-011295 ◽  
Author(s):  
Craig S Brown ◽  
Joceline V Vu ◽  
Ryan A Howard ◽  
Vidhya Gunaseelan ◽  
Chad M Brummett ◽  
...  

BackgroundOpioids are prescribed in excess after surgery. We leveraged our continuous quality improvement infrastructure to implement opioid prescribing guidelines and subsequently evaluate changes in postoperative opioid prescribing, consumption and patient satisfaction/pain in a statewide regional health system.MethodsWe collected data regarding postoperative prescription size, opioid consumption and patient-reported outcomes from February 2017 to May 2019, from a 70-hospital surgical collaborative. Three iterations of prescribing guidelines were released. An interrupted time series analysis before and after each guideline release was performed. Linear regression was used to identify trends in consumption and patient-reported outcomes over time.ResultsWe included 36 022 patients from 69 hospitals who underwent one of nine procedures in the guidelines, of which 15 174 (37.3%) had complete patient-reported outcomes data following surgery. Before the intervention, prescription size was decreasing over time (slope: −0.7 tablets of 5 mg oxycodone/month, 95% CI −1.0 to −0.5 tablets, p<0.001). After the first guideline release, prescription size declined by −1.4 tablets/month (95% CI −1.8 to −1.0 tablets, p<0.001). The difference between these slopes was significant (p=0.006). The second guideline release resulted in a relative increase in slope (−0.3 tablets/month, 95% CI −0.1 to −0.6, p<0.001). The third guideline release resulted in no change (p=0.563 for the intervention). Overall, mean (SD) prescription size decreased from 25 (17) tablets of 5 mg oxycodone to 12 (8) tablets. Opioid consumption also decreased from 11 (16) to 5 (7) tablets (p<0.001), while satisfaction and postoperative pain remained unchanged.ConclusionsThe use of procedure-specific prescribing guidelines reduced statewide postoperative opioid prescribing by 50% while providing satisfactory pain care. These results demonstrate meaningful impact on opioid prescribing using evidence-based best practices and serve as an example of successful utilisation of a regional health collaborative for quality improvement.


Hand ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 155894471986712 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jenna R. Adalbert ◽  
Asif M. Ilyas

Background: A lack of established opioid-prescribing guidelines has prompted recent studies to propose preliminary guidelines to mitigate inadvertent overprescribing, diversion, and abuse. The purpose of our study was to assess the efficacy of a specific set of opioid-prescribing guidelines by prospective evaluation of patient consumption and satisfaction. Methods: During a consecutive period, all patients undergoing outpatient upper extremity surgical procedures were postoperatively prescribed opioids based on published guidelines that were specific to the anatomical location and procedure being performed. At the first postoperative visit, surgical details, opioid consumption patterns, and prescription efficacy and satisfaction were recorded. Results: A total of 201 patients reported any amount of prescription use, resulting in a mean consumption of 5.5 pills. Patients who underwent soft tissue procedures reported the lowest requirement (4.2 pills) compared with those who underwent fracture repairs (6.7 pills) or arthroscopy and arthroplasty/fusion procedures (8.7 pills). Patients undergoing hand procedures consumed fewer opioids (3.9 pills) compared with those undergoing wrist (6.3 pills) or elbow (8.1 pills) procedures. Of the patients requiring opioids, 82% reported being satisfied or at least neutral to the prescribed quantity ( P < .001), and 92% reported being satisfied or at least neutral to the prescribed opioid analgesic efficacy ( P < .001). Overall, the study refill request rate was 13%. Conclusions: Although the proposed guidelines tended to exceed patient need, the study confirmed strong patient satisfaction and an overall refill request rate of only 13%. We conclude that following anatomical and procedure-specific opioid-prescribing guidelines is an effective method of prescribing opioids postoperatively after upper extremity.


2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 241-249
Author(s):  
Warren D. Bromberg, MD, FACS ◽  
Tracey Emanuel, MSN, RN, FNP-BC ◽  
Valerie Zeller, MA, RN ◽  
Elizabeth Galloway, BSN, RN, CAPA ◽  
Susan Mogan, DNP, ANP-BC, ACHPN, AP-PMN ◽  
...  

Objective: To evaluate the prescribing practices and opioid consumption in an ambulatory setting to inform the development of evidence-based guidelines.Design: A prospective study of adults undergoing outpatient open and laparoscopic surgeries over 3 months. One week after discharge, a telephonic interview quantified the number of opioids prescribed and consumed, degree of pain control and satisfaction, and whether additional pain medication was requested. Setting: Community hospital ambulatory surgery center in Westchester County, New York.Participants: This study included 304 adults undergoing a variety of procedures by surgeons from multiple specialties.Main outcome measures: Quantify surgeons’ postoperative opioid prescribing compared with patient opioid consumption.Results: Eighty-one percent (N = 245) responded to the survey, of which 64 percent were prescribed opioids. Males and females were equally represented with the mean age of 59.4 years. Of those prescribed opioids, 92 percent filled the prescription. The most commonly prescribed opioids reported by the patients that filled their prescription (N = 145) were oxycodone (36.5 percent), oxycodone/acetaminophen (28.9 percent), and tramadol (22.7 percent). The mean number of opioid pills prescribed was 20 and the mean consumption was 6.7 pills, resulting in an average of 13 retained pills. Only 3.8 percent of the patients prescribed opioids at discharge called their provider for additional analgesia. Despite the low opioid consumption patients reported high satisfaction (4.5 on scale of 0-5) with pain control. Only 10.4 percent reported that the surgeon recommended an over the counter (OTC) analgesic option. There was variability in the amount of opioids prescribed within each surgical category.Conclusions: One week after outpatient surgery, patients consumed one-third of physician-prescribed opioids, yet they reported high pain management satisfaction. Our study will inform the development of a patient-centered interdisciplinary perioperative education program to more effectively tailor multimodal pain management in ambulatory surgical patients and collaterally reduce the number of retained opioids.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document