Impact of parenteral opioid shortage on opioid prescriptions among patients seen by the palliative care team of a comprehensive cancer center.

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (34_suppl) ◽  
pp. 201-201
Author(s):  
Ali Haider ◽  
Yu Qian ◽  
Zhanni Lu ◽  
Syed Mussadiq Ali Akbar Naqvi ◽  
Amy Zhuang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Pain Management ◽  
Cancer Pain ◽  
Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Type ◽  
Cancer Pain Management ◽  
Before And After ◽  
The Impact

201 Background: Recent parenteral opioid shortage (POS) has the potential to impact cancer pain management in hospitalized patients. This study aims to compare changes in the opioid prescriptions by the inpatient palliative care (PC) team before and after the institution first reported the POS. Methods: We reviewed and compared the electronic health records of 386 consecutive eligible consultations seen by the inpatient PC team equally in one month before and after the announcement of POS on February 8, 2018. The eligibility criteria include (1) cancer diagnosis, (2) ≥18 years of age, (3) taking opioid medication at the time of consultation, and (4) having at least two consecutive visits with the PC team. Patient demographics, cancer type, opioid type, route, and dose defined as the morphine equivalent daily dose were assessed. Results: POS was associated with less use of parenteral opioids (patient controlled analgesia, and intravenous breakthrough) and more use of non-parenteral opioids (extended release, transdermal, and oral breakthrough) by the referring oncology teams, and PC team (P≤.001) (Table 1). At first PC follow-up, significantly less proportion of patients achieved better pain control after POS [119/193 (62%) versus 144/193 (75%) (P=.006)] However, at second PC follow-up, the proportion of pain improvement was similar in both cohorts. Conclusions: There is a significant change in opioid routes associated with POS. POS was associated with worse analgesia. More research is needed to better understand the impact of POS on cancer pain management.[Table: see text]

scholarly journals Cancer pain management in an oncological ward in a comprehensive cancer center with an established palliative care unit

2013 ◽  
Vol 21 (12) ◽  
pp. 3287-3292 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sebastiano Mercadante ◽  
Costanza Guccione ◽  
Simona Di Fatta ◽  
Valentina Alaimo ◽  
Giovanna Prestia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Pain Management ◽  
Cancer Pain ◽  
Palliative Care Unit ◽  
Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Pain Management

Long- and short-acting opioids in cancer pain management: What is the best ratio?

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (31_suppl) ◽  
pp. 206-206
Author(s):  
Alison Wiesenthal ◽  
Natalie Moryl ◽  
Paul A. Glare
Keyword(s):  
Pain Management ◽  
Cancer Pain ◽  
Breakthrough Pain ◽  
Retrospective Chart Review ◽  
Clinic Visit ◽  
Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Pain Management ◽  
Short Acting ◽  
Chronic Cancer Pain

206 Background: Many cancer patients experience chronic and breakthrough pain necessitating the use of both immediate release (IR) and extended release (ER) opioids. The common strategy in treating chronic cancer pain is using ER opioids with the addition of IR opioids for breakthrough pain. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network recommends IR dosing at 0.1-0.2 times the daily ER dose as needed every 1 hour for breakthrough pain, though data is lacking to validate this recommendation. The aim of this exploratory study was to review the current practice in prescribing IR and ER opioids and the IR/ER ratio used in cancer pain management at one comprehensive cancer center (CCC). Methods: We performed a retrospective chart review of 54 consecutive patients at a CCC over a 6 month period. IR/ER doses, dose adjustments and satisfaction with analgesia were recorded. Adjustments in treatment plans were made based on patients' report of effectiveness and side effects associated with ER and IR opioids. Results: 19 of 54 (35%) patients reported adequate analgesia, with the average daily prescribed IR/ER ratio of 0.6 (range 0 to 3.75). In this group, IR opioids were unchanged during the clinic visit. The ER opioids, on average, were also unchanged, though decreased by 25% and increased by 50% in a few cases over serial clinic visits. Of those patients reporting suboptimal analgesia during the clinic visit (65%), 80% had their ER opioids increased, 6% had IR opioids increased, and 9% had both IR and ER increased. The ER opioids were increased by 40% on average and IR by 11% with the average IR/ER ratio changing from 0.5 (range 0-2) to 0.37 (range 0-1.13). Conclusions: These preliminary data highlight the great variability between patient preferences and clinician decisions in terms of IR/ER opioid ratios. In this retrospective study, analgesia was better in the group using higher IR doses with a higher IR/ER ratio. At the same time, patients with suboptimal analgesia had their ER opioids titrated faster and higher than the IR opioids. More studies are needed to determine best practice in the prescribing of long and short acting opioids for management of chronic cancer pain.

Retrospective analysis of pharmacist interventions in an ambulatory palliative care practice

2016 ◽  
Vol 22 (6) ◽  
pp. 757-765 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph D Ma ◽  
Victor Tran ◽  
Carissa Chan ◽  
William M Mitchell ◽  
Rabia S Atayee
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Care Practice ◽  
Cancer Type ◽  
Pharmacist Interventions ◽  
Medication Dose ◽  
Long Acting ◽  
Medication Changes

Background We have previously reported the development of an outpatient palliative care practice under pharmacist–physician collaboration. The Doris A. Howell Service at the University of California, San Diego Moores Cancer Center includes two pharmacists who participate in a transdisciplinary clinic and provide follow-up care to patients. Objective This study evaluated pharmacist interventions and patient outcomes of a pharmacist-led outpatient palliative care practice. Methods This was a retrospective data analysis conducted at a single, academic, comprehensive cancer center. New (first visit) patient consultations were referred by an oncologist or hematologist to an outpatient palliative care practice. A pharmacist evaluated the patient at the first visit and at follow-up (second, third, and fourth visits). Medication problems identified, medication changes made, and changes in pain scores were assessed. Results Eighty-four new and 135 follow-up patient visits with the pharmacist occurred from March 2011 to March 2012. All new patients ( n = 80) were mostly women ( n = 44), had localized disease ( n = 42), a gastrointestinal cancer type ( n = 21), and were on a long-acting ( n = 61) and short-acting ( n = 70) opioid. A lack of medication efficacy was the most common problem for symptoms of pain, constipation, and nausea/vomiting that was identified by the pharmacist at all visits. A change in pain medication dose and initiation of a new medication for constipation and nausea/vomiting were the most common interventions by the pharmacist. A statistically significant change in pain score was observed for the third visit, but not for the second and fourth visits. Conclusions A pharmacist-led outpatient palliative care practice identified medication problems for management of pain, constipation, and nausea/vomiting. Medication changes involved a change in dose and/or initiating a new medication. Trends were observed in improvement and stabilization of pain over subsequent clinic visits.

Hematology and oncology fellows' attitude and knowledge in cancer pain management.

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (29_suppl) ◽  
pp. 178-178
Author(s):  
Fade A. Mahmoud ◽  
Konstantinos Arnaoutakis ◽  
Pooja Motwani ◽  
Liudmila N. Schafer ◽  
Paulette Mehta ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Pain Management ◽  
Cancer Pain ◽  
Palliative Medicine ◽  
Management Education ◽  
Management Skills ◽  
Cancer Pain Management ◽  
Before And After ◽  
American Society ◽  
Strongly Agree

178 Background: The American Society of Clinical Oncology considers palliative care an integral part of cancer therapy. Our Hematology and Oncology fellowship at the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences (UAMS) began a year-long palliative care curriculum to improve symptom management education. In this pilot study we evaluate fellows’ attitude and knowledge in cancer pain management before and after implementing a pain management curriculum. Methods: Hematology and Oncology Fellows were divided into three groups. Each group delivered a one hour lecture in pain management for a total of 3 didactic lectures. We adopted “Evidence based Practice of Palliative Medicine by Goldstein and Morrison” as the main textbook. Fellows answered a 30 item questionnaire to address attitudes and knowledge in pain management. Answers were scored using a 5 point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree). Results: 11 fellows participated; six males, five females, median age 34 (R 28-40), one US graduate, and ten foreign graduates. More fellows felt comfortable managing acute (M = 4.3, SD = 0.48) compared to chronic (M = 3.8, SD 0.78) cancer related pain. Most believe that if they were taught the principle of pain management they would feel more comfortable managing pain (M = 4.6, SD = 0.51). Post pain management module, there was a statistically significant improvement in fellow’s knowledge in pain management in the setting of renal failure (P = 0.02) and bone pain (P = 0.006), and a trend towards statistically significant in both opioid rotation and conversion (P = 0.06). Fellows did poorly on opioid-drugs interaction and management of neuropathic pain. Fellows valued palliative medicine service as a great resource for their patients but most believe that they should not refer all their patients to palliative medicine for pain management. Conclusions: Pain management skills are eroding among Oncology fellows and efforts should be made to enhance symptom and pain management education in oncology training programs. This curriculum improved knowledge and self-efficacy in pain management and revealed areas for further improvement. More research is needed to address whether fellows use and apply pain management skills in the clinical setting.

Assessment of adequacy of pain management in advance cancer patients.

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. e283-e287
Author(s):  
Harminder Singh ◽  
Raja Banipal
Keyword(s):  
Pain Management ◽  
Cancer Pain ◽  
Dose Titration ◽  
Cancer Type ◽  
Cancer Pain Management ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Pain Management Index ◽  
Cancer Types ◽  
New Formulation

e283 Background: Cancer prevalence in India is estimated around 2.0-2.5 million, 0.7- 0.8 million new cases identified every year, and cancer deaths reported per year is 0.4-0.5 Million. The objective of this study was to estimation of the prevalence of inadequate cancer pain management in patients with advanced cancer. Methods: Adequacy of pain management, that is Pain Management Index calculated for each patient. It is simple indexes which usually indicate a connection of the reported level of pain to the potency of the analgesics prescribed Results: 211 patients were recruited with most prevalent cancer type was genitourinary, diagnosed in 28.7% patients, followed by breast cancer 23.1% and head & neck cancer 20.3%. Among 211 patients with cancer, 76.85% patients had inadequate pain management and 23.14% had better control of pain. Association of inadequacy of pain were done with age, gender, occupation, family history, duration and cancer types, signification relation was observed with age group and analgesic use. (See table.) Conclusions: Our inadequate pain management prevalence rate of about 78% was far too high so this study will highlight the importance of true status of cancer pain management. It also emphasized that systematic recording of pain intensity and follow up further enhance the entire pain management mechanism including dose titration to change of new formulation. [Table: see text]

Opioid Rotation for Toxicity Reduction (DRAFT)

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Cecilia Tenorio ◽  
Akhila Reddy
Keyword(s):  
Pain Management ◽  
Cancer Pain ◽  
Clinical Case ◽  
Cancer Pain Management ◽  
Opioid Rotation ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Daily Dose ◽  
Study Intervention ◽  
Morphine Equivalent

This chapter discusses the de Stoutz et al. retrospective review of patients with cancer pain who developed dose-limiting toxicities and underwent opioid rotation that resulted in improvement of symptoms related to opioid induced neurotoxicity, uncontrolled pain, and reduction in morphine equivalent daily dose. This study is the first to establish that opioid rotation, which is substituting one opioid with another using established equianalgesic conversion ratios, is a valuable tool in cancer pain management. This chapter describes the basics of the study, including funding, year study began, year study was published, study location, who was studied, who was excluded, how many patients, study design, study intervention, follow-up, endpoints, results, and criticism and limitations. The chapter briefly reviews other relevant studies and information, gives a summary and discusses implications, and concludes with a relevant clinical case.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document