Chronic noncancer pain management in primary care: family medicine physicians’ risk assessment of opioid misuse

The prevalence of opioid abuse has reached an epidemic level. National guidelines recommend safer opioid prescribing practices, including potentially monitoring patients with urine drug testing (UDT). There is limited research evidence surrounding the use of UDT in the context of chronic noncancer pain (CNCP). We evaluated the efficacy of systematic, randomized UDT to detect and manage opioid misuse among patients with CNCP in primary care. The Marathon Family Health Team (MFHT) designed and implemented a clinic-wide, randomized UDT program called the HARMS (High-yield Approach to Risk Mitigation and Safety) Program. This retrospective chart review includes 77 CNCP patients being prescribed opioids, who were initially stratified by their prescriber as “low-risk.” Each month, 10 percent of patients were selected for a random UDT with double testing (immunoassay and liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry). The primary outcome measure was UDT leading to a change in management plan. Of the 77 patients in the study, 55 (71 percent) completed at least one UDT during the 12-month study period. Overall, 22 patients had aberrant results. UDT led directly to changes in management in 15 of those patients. Four of those 15 patients were escalated to an addictions program, two were tapered from opioids with informed discussion, and nine were escalated to the high-risk monitoring stream. The results of this study show that in low-risk CNCP patients prescribed opioids, applying systematic UDT in a primary care setting is effective for detecting high risk behaviors and addiction, and altering management. Further research is needed with larger numbers using a prospective study design.

Download Full-text

Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Noncancer Pain in Primary Care: Risk Assessment

Postgraduate Medicine ◽

10.3810/pgm.2014.09.2810 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 126 (5) ◽

pp. 159-166 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Allan Gordon ◽

Edward J. Cone ◽

Anne Z. DePriest ◽

Robert A. Axford-Gatley ◽

Steven D. Passik

Keyword(s):

Risk Assessment ◽

Primary Care ◽

Chronic Noncancer Pain ◽

Noncancer Pain

Download Full-text

Teaching Chronic Pain in the Family Medicine Residency

Family Medicine ◽

10.22454/fammed.2018.134727 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 50 (1) ◽

pp. 22-27

Author(s):

Kimberly Zoberi ◽

Kelly M. Everard

Keyword(s):

Risk Assessment ◽

Primary Care ◽

Chronic Pain ◽

Pain Management ◽

Family Medicine ◽

Pain Assessment ◽

Primary Care Physicians ◽

The United States ◽

Care Physician ◽

Family Medicine Residency

Background and Objectives: Chronic pain is a significant condition affecting many Americans. Primary care physicians play an important role in chronic pain management, but many residents and physicians feel poorly prepared to manage it. Methods: Data were collected as part of the 2016 Council of Academic Family Medicine Educational Research Alliance (CERA) Program Director Survey, which was sent electronically to 484 program directors in the United States. The authors sought to determine whether residency directors’ attitudes about treating chronic pain were associated with the amount of time devoted to teaching family medicine residents about chronic pain assessment, therapy (use of opioids, use adjuvant pain medications, use of other nonopioids, use of nonpharmacological treatments), and risk management (risk assessment, use of pain management contracts, informed consent when prescribing opioids, and urine drug monitoring). Attitudes were assessed by asking whether: (1) chronic pain is best managed by a primary care physician (PCP); (2) prescribing opioid medications is time consuming; (3) prescribing opioids is high-risk; (4) prescribing opioids contributes to opioid misuse; and (4) effective nonopioid treatments exist. An additional question assessed confidence in treating chronic pain. Results: The response rate was 53%. The average family medicine residency devotes about 33 hours to education about pain management topics including 5.4 hours on chronic pain assessment, 16.2 hours on therapy, and 11.4 hours on risk assessment. Residency directors’ belief that there are effective nonopioid treatments for chronic pain was the only attitude item that was associated with teaching about chronic pain. Conclusions: Residency directors’ attitudes do not predict the time devoted to teaching chronic pain in family medicine residencies.

Download Full-text

Intake Assessment of Problematic Use of Medications in a Chronic Noncancer Pain Clinic

Pain Research and Management ◽

10.1155/2012/489743 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 17 (4) ◽

pp. 276-280 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Leah R Pink ◽

Andrew J Smith ◽

Philip WH Peng ◽

Marilyn J Galonski ◽

Paul S Tumber ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Risk Assessment ◽

Pain Management ◽

Assessment Tool ◽

Assessment Process ◽

Risk Assessment Tool ◽

Pain Clinic ◽

Chronic Noncancer Pain ◽

Intake Assessment ◽

Problematic Use ◽

Noncancer Pain

BACKGROUND: The present article outlines the process of instituting an assessment of risk of problematic use of medications with new patients in an ambulatory chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) clinic. It is hoped that the authors’ experience through this iterative process will fill the gap in the literature by setting an example of an application of the ‘universal precautions’ approach to chronic pain management.OBJECTIVES: To assess the feasibility and utility of the addition of a new risk assessment process and to provide a snapshot of the risk of problematic use of medications in new patients presenting to a tertiary ambulatory clinic treating CNCP.METHODS: Charts for the first three months following the institution of an intake assessment for risk of problematic medication use were reviewed. Health care providers at the Wasser Pain Management Centre (Toronto, Ontario) were interviewed to discuss the preliminary findings and provide feedback about barriers to completing the intake assessments, as well as to identify the items that were clinically relevant and useful to their practice.RESULTS: Data were analyzed and examined for completeness. While some measures were considered to be particularly helpful, other items were regarded as repetitive, problematic or time consuming. Feedback was then incorporated into revisions of the risk assessment tool.DISCUSSION: Overall, it is feasible and useful to assess risk for problematic use of medications in new patients presenting to CNCP clinics.CONCLUSION: To facilitate the practice of assessment, the risk assessment tool at intake must be concise, clinically relevant and feasible given practitioner time constraints.

Download Full-text

Supplemental Material for Prescriber Adherence to Guidelines for Chronic Noncancer Pain Management With Opioids: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Health Psychology ◽

10.1037/hea0000830.supp ◽

2020 ◽

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Pain Management ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Adherence To Guidelines ◽

Chronic Noncancer Pain ◽

Noncancer Pain

Download Full-text

Treatment of chronic noncancer pain in patients on opioid therapy in primary care: A retrospective cohort study

Canadian Pharmacists Journal / Revue des Pharmaciens du Canada ◽

10.1177/1715163519887766 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 153 (1) ◽

pp. 52-58

Author(s):

Arden R. Barry ◽

Chantal E. Chris

Keyword(s):

Primary Care ◽

Cohort Study ◽

Back Pain ◽

Retrospective Cohort Study ◽

Retrospective Cohort ◽

Opioid Therapy ◽

Opioid Agonist ◽

Chronic Noncancer Pain ◽

Opioid Dose ◽

Noncancer Pain

Background: This study sought to characterize the real-world treatment of chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) in patients on opioid therapy in primary care. Methods: A retrospective cohort study from 2014-18 was conducted at a multidisciplinary primary care clinic in Chilliwack, British Columbia. Included were adults on daily opioid therapy for CNCP. Patients receiving palliative care or ≤1 visit were excluded. Outcomes of interest included use of opioid/nonopioid pharmacotherapy, number/frequency of visits and proportion of patients able to reduce/discontinue opioid therapy. Results: Seventy patients (mean age 53 years, 53% male, 51% back pain) were included. Median follow-up was 6 visits over 12 months. Sixty-two patients (89%) reduced their opioid dose, 6 patients had no change and 2 patients required a dose increase. Mean opioid dose was reduced from 183 to 70 mg morphine equivalents daily. Twenty-four patients (34%) discontinued opioid therapy, 6 patients (9%) transitioned to opioid agonist therapy and 6 patients (9%) breached their opioid treatment agreement. Nonopioid pharmacotherapy included nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (64%), gabapentinoids (63%), tricyclic antidepressants (56%) and nabilone (51%). Discussion: Over half of patients were no longer on opioid therapy by the end of the study. Most patients had a disorder (e.g., back pain) for which opioids are generally not recommended. Overall mean opioid dose was reduced from baseline by approximately 60% over 1 year. Lack of access to specialized pain treatments may have accounted for high nonopioid pharmacotherapy usage. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that treatment of CNCP and opioid tapering can successfully be achieved in a primary care setting. Can Pharm J (Ott) 2020;153:xx-xx.

Download Full-text

How opioid prescribing policies influence primary care clinicians’ treatment decisions and conversations with patients with chronic pain

Journal of Opioid Management ◽

10.5055/jom.2021.0684 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 17 (6) ◽

pp. 499-509

Author(s):

Elizabeth C. Danielson, PhD ◽

Christopher A. Harle, PhD ◽

Sarah M. Downs, MPH ◽

Laura Militello, MA ◽

Olena Mazurenko, MD, PhD

Keyword(s):

Primary Care ◽

Chronic Pain ◽

Treatment Decisions ◽

Healthcare Organizations ◽

Chronic Noncancer Pain ◽

Opioid Prescribing ◽

Prevention Guideline ◽

Multistep Process ◽

Primary Care Clinicians ◽

Noncancer Pain

Objective: The 2016 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guideline for prescribing opioids for chronic pain aimed to assist primary care clinicians in safely and effectively prescribing opioids for chronic noncancer pain. Individual states, payers, and health systems issued similar policies imposing various regulations around opioid prescribing for patients with chronic pain. Experts argued that healthcare organizations and clinicians may be misapplying the federal guideline and subsequent opioid prescribing policies, leading to an inadequate pain management. The objective of this study was to understand how primary care clinicians involve opioid prescribing policies in their treatment decisions and in their conversations with patients with chronic pain.Design: We conducted a secondary qualitative analysis of data from 64 unique primary care visits and 87 post-visit interviews across 20 clinicians from three healthcare systems in the Midwestern United States. Using a multistep process and thematic analysis, we systematically analyzed data excerpts addressing opioid prescribing policies.Results: Opioid prescribing policies influenced clinicians’ treatment decisions to not initiate opioids, prescribe fewer opioids overall (theme #1), and begin tapering and discontinuation of opioids (theme #2) for most patients with chronic pain. Clinical precautions, described in the opioid prescribing policies to monitor use, were directly invoked during visits for patients with chronic pain (theme #3).Conclusions: Opioid prescribing policies have multidimensional influence on clinician treatment decisions for patients with chronic pain. Our findings may inform future studies to explore mechanisms for aligning pressures around opioid prescribing, stemming from various opioid prescribing policies, with the need to deliver individualized pain care.

Download Full-text