scholarly journals The Opioid Epidemic: What Pakistan can Learn from the US

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 41 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S246-S247
Author(s):  
Brielle Weinstein ◽  
Dominique Pagnozzi ◽  
Alexa Abitabilo ◽  
Lilla Kis ◽  
Madeline Carney ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction There is a growing concern regarding the unprecedented increase in morbidity and mortality related to the use of opioids. Prescription opioid abuse has been increasing dramatically in recent years. Prescription opioids have been shown to be favorable in perioperative management, however, their impact on chronic usage remains unclear. As an effort to help reduce opioid consumption following hospitalization for burn injuries, we look to evaluate the outpatient opioid consumption following hospital discharge at our institution. Methods After IRB approval, we obtained demographics, medical history, inpatient and outpatient opioid usage, treatment, and length of hospital stay of patients admitted with burn injuries who met study inclusion criteria (age ≥ 12 years and no history of opioid abuse prior to hospitalization) from January 1, 2011 to January 1, 2018. Data was analyzed using SAS v9.4. Results Our preliminary data included 210 patients with average age of 58 years, 75% non-Hispanic Caucasians and average total burn surface area of 18%. Medical histories observed included: hypertension (40%), diabetes (15%), hyperlipidemia (11%), depression (7%), and bipolar disorder (3%) among many others. 79% of patients had surgical intervention including excision and grafting, of which 32% had autografting procedures. All patients were treated with opioids during hospitalization, which included: fentanyl, hydromorphone, oxycodone-acetaminophen, morphine and oxycodone. 6% of patients had pain management consultation during hospitalization. 79% of patients were discharged with an opioid prescription, of which 21% had their opioid refilled during follow-up. There was no statistically significant difference in discharge opioid prescriptions (79% had surgical intervention versus 76% had no surgical intervention, p=0.69) and outpatient opioid prescription refills (17% had surgical intervention versus 17% had no surgical intervention, p=0.99) between patients who had surgical intervention for burn injuries versus those who did not. Conclusions This evaluation shows that there is no statistical difference in opioid usage between patients who had surgical intervention and those who did not for their burn injury treatments. Therefore, prescription opioids may not be necessary in postoperative care following hospital discharge. Applicability of Research to Practice With further research, we hope to evaluate the need for outpatient opioid prescriptions this treatment modality in effort of decreasing the order and use of opioids following hospital discharge in burn patients.


2021 ◽  
Vol 78 (4) ◽  
pp. 320-326
Author(s):  
Nathan Ash ◽  
Jedediah Tuten ◽  
Wayne Bohenek ◽  
Brian Latham

Abstract Purpose To describe the implementation of a comprehensive program to address the opioid epidemic in a large health system and to assess the effect of the program on opioid prescribing. Summary Mercy Health is a nonprofit, Catholic health system that employs over 1,400 providers and operates 23 hospitals in Ohio and Kentucky, 2 states that have experienced large numbers of overdoses. As a good community partner, the health system developed a comprehensive plan to address the opioid crisis. A system-wide Opioid Steering Committee was established to implement and manage the program. The committee was chaired by a senior pharmacy executive and supported by 4 subcommittees: the data analytics, education development, outreach and assessment, and electronic health record (EHR) subcommittees. The 4 subcommittees developed and implemented several initiatives, including forming a database with prescribing data by specialty and geographical location, implementing a standardized screening approach in the emergency department, challenging hospitals to create partnerships with local schools, and creating EHR enhancements to change opioid prescribing habits. When normalized for patient volume, the prescribed opioid burden was reduced from 65.3 to 35.2 morphine milligram equivalents per unique patient from 2016 to 2019 (a 46% absolute reduction). During this same time the number of acute prescription orders with a morphine equivalent dose greater than 30 was reduced by 52% (from 37,793 to 17,822 prescriptions per year). Conclusion Mercy Health’s comprehensive approach to the opioid epidemic has successfully impacted opioid prescribing habits, screening practices, and community outreach.


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 ◽  
Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S586-S587
Author(s):  
Caroline G Coleman ◽  
Timothy T Daugherty ◽  
Yooree G Chung ◽  
Angel X Xiao ◽  
Amy C Sherman ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The medical community has used Twitter as a learning tool during the COVID-19 pandemic to digest the high volume of rapidly evolving literature. However, Twitter contains educational content of varying quality and accuracy. To address this issue, we created and disseminated visual abstracts of COVID-19 literature on Twitter to educate health professionals. Methods Fellows and faculty members from multiple institutions collaborated with Emory University medical students to create visual abstracts of published COVID-19 literature (Figure 1). ID fellows and faculty identified and summarized 10-15 high-impact COVID-19 articles each week. Medical students created visual abstracts for each article, which fellows or faculty reviewed for accuracy. We disseminated them on Twitter (@JenniferSpicer4, 4,373 followers) and our website (Figure 2). We measured engagement with tweets using Twitter Analytics. Figure 1: COVID-19 Visual Abstract Example Figure 2: Website hosting COVID-19 weekly literature summaries and visual abstracts (https://med.emory.edu/departments/medicine/divisions/infectious-diseases/covid19-roundup/) Results Since March 2020, we have created, reviewed, and disseminated 139 graphics with 116 student authors and 33 fellow/faculty reviewers across three academic institutions (Table 1). Topics included public health & prevention, virology & basic science, epidemiology, transmission & infection control, clinical syndrome, diagnostics, therapeutics, vaccinology, and ethics & policy. Tweets had a median of 9,300 impressions (interquartile range [IQR] 5,432-13,233) with 766 engagements (IQR 432-1,288) and an engagement rate of 8.6% (IQR 7.1%-10.0%) (Table 2). Each tweet had a median of 25 retweets (IQR 17-38) and 55 likes (IQR 34-81). A few tweets had significantly higher metrics; maximum values were 84,257 impressions, 9,758 engagements, 19.0% engagement rate, 239 retweets, and 381 likes. In addition to disseminating graphics on Twitter, we received requests to use them as teaching aids from multiple health professionals worldwide, and the visual abstracts have been translated into Spanish and disseminated on Twitter and Instagram via @MEdSinFrontera. Table 1: Descriptive Statistics of COVID-19 Visual Series Table 2: Twitter Metrics for COVID-19 Visual Series (as of 6/10/2020) Conclusion Engagement rates with our visual abstracts were high, demonstrating the power of Twitter. ID educators can use visual abstracts to summarize and disseminate accurate information to a large audience on social media, which is especially important in the setting of an emerging infection. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures


2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Razan Nour ◽  
Kerry Jobling ◽  
Alasdair Mayer ◽  
Salma Babikir

Abstract Background Otolaryngology (ENT), plastic surgery, ophthalmology and dermatology are medical specialties which tend to receive less coverage in UK medical school curricula compared to larger, generalist specialties. As a result, there are fewer opportunities for medical students to learn and to cultivate an interest. There are numerous papers that report concerns about junior doctors’ ability to manage conditions within these specialties, which may jeopardise patient safety. The aim of our pilot project was to increase medical students’ interest and knowledge of ENT, plastic surgery, ophthalmology and dermatology. In addition to describing our project, we present and discuss literature on UK undergraduate education in these specialties and its impact on preparedness of junior doctors and future career choices. Methods One hundred twelve final year medical students at Newcastle University were invited to take part in a voluntary two-part (written and clinical) exam, in which prizes could be won and all participants would receive a certificate of participation. We distributed two online surveys to the students, one administered before the exam and one afterwards. Data was collected regarding the students’ motivation for entering the prize exam and the students’ baseline interest and knowledge in these specialties before and after the prize exam. Free-text responses were collected about the students’ opinion of the project and whether participation was beneficial. Results Sixteen students participated in the exam. There was a statistically significant increase in the students’ knowledge in ENT (p < 0.000), plastic surgery (p < 0.000), ophthalmology (p < 0.028) and dermatology (p < 0.012) after participation in the exam, but not in their interest levels. ENT was the preferred specialty of our cohort. The students reported that they found participation beneficial to their learning, particularly receiving exam feedback and explanations to exam questions. Conclusions This pilot project was a useful intervention in increasing medical students’ knowledge in these specialties, but not in their levels of interest. It also demonstrates that medical students are willing to participate in voluntary initiatives (in their spare time) to gain more learning opportunities and that medical students value timely exam feedback to guide their revision.


2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 90-94 ◽  
Author(s):  
Catharina Klausenitz ◽  
Thomas Hesse ◽  
Henriette Hacker ◽  
Klaus Hahnenkamp ◽  
Taras Usichenko

Objective Auricular acupuncture (AA) is effective for the treatment of preoperative anxiety. We aimed to study the feasibility and effects of AA on exam anxiety in a prospective observational pilot study. Methods Healthy medical students received bilateral AA using indwelling fixed needles at points MA-IC1, MA-TF1, MA-SC, MA-AH7, and MA-T on the day before an anatomy exam. The needles were removed after the exam. Anxiety levels were measured using the State-Trait-Anxiety Inventory (STAI) and a 100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS-100) before and after the AA intervention and once again immediately before the exam. The duration of sleep on the night before the exam was recorded and compared to that over the preceding 1 week and 6 months (all through students’ recollection). In addition, blood pressure, heart rate and the acceptability of AA to the students were recorded. Results Ten students (all female) were included in the final analysis. All tolerated the needles well and stated they would wish to receive AA again for exam anxiety in the future. Exam anxiety measured using both STAI and VAS-100 decreased by almost 20% after AA. Conclusions AA was well accepted, the outcome measurement was feasible, and the results have facilitated the calculation of the sample size for a subsequent randomised controlled trial.


PEDIATRICS ◽  
1991 ◽  
Vol 88 (6) ◽  
pp. 1233-1237
Author(s):  
Lewis H. Margolis

How physicians respond to the promotional activities of the pharmaceutical industry is the subject of ongoing debate and controversy. This paper postulates that the acceptance of gifts in virtually any form violates fundamental duties of the physician of nonmaleficence, fidelity, justice, and self-improvement. The medical community must articulate this position clearly, and it should act accordingly.


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.


2021 ◽  
pp. OP.20.01041
Author(s):  
Yael Schenker ◽  
Megan Hamm ◽  
Hailey W. Bulls ◽  
Jessica S. Merlin ◽  
Rachel Wasilko ◽  
...  

PURPOSE: Responses to the opioid epidemic in the United States, including efforts to monitor and limit prescriptions for noncancer pain, may be affecting patients with cancer. Oncologists' views on how the opioid epidemic may be influencing treatment of cancer-related pain are not well understood. METHODS: We conducted a multisite qualitative interview study with 26 oncologists from a mix of urban and rural practices in Western Pennsylvania. The interview guide asked about oncologists' views of and experiences in treating cancer-related pain in the context of the opioid epidemic. A multidisciplinary team conducted thematic analysis of interview transcripts to identify and refine themes related to challenges to safe and effective opioid prescribing for cancer-related pain and recommendations for improvement. RESULTS: Oncologists described three main challenges: (1) patients who receive opioids for cancer-related pain feel stigmatized by clinicians, pharmacists, and society; (2) patients with cancer-related pain fear becoming addicted, which affects their willingness to accept prescription opioids; and (3) guidelines for safe and effective opioid prescribing are often misinterpreted, leading to access issues. Suggested improvements included educational materials for patients and families, efforts to better inform prescribers and the public about safe and appropriate uses of opioids for cancer-related pain, and additional support from pain and/or palliative care specialists. CONCLUSION: Challenges to safe and effective opioid prescribing for cancer-related pain include opioid stigma and access barriers. Interventions that address opioid stigma and provide additional resources for clinicians navigating complex opioid prescribing guidelines may help to optimize cancer pain treatment.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document