Pharmaceutical perspective of neuropathic pain management for primary care providers.

Neuropathic pain (NP) is a chronic condition that affects ~ 1% of the general population globally. Several conditions such as chronic diabetes, herpes zoster (HZ), cancer, HIV, stroke, multiple sclerosis, physical compression or damage of nerves and certain surgical procedures can lead to neuropathy and related pain. The condition is difficult to treat with traditional analgesic drugs. Typically, non-traditional analgesics are used in treating pain in this condition such as antidepressants and antiepileptic drugs. Opioids are useful in some patients, but the risk of addiction and the risk of both short-term and long-term adverse effects make it a low priority drug class in the treatment of NP. In the current review we discuss the pharmacology and pharmaceutical care aspects of various classes of drugs used in the treatment of NP, counselling points for these drug classes, and future prospects in the treatment of NP.

Treating Chronic Pain with Buprenorphine-The Practical Guide.

OPINION STATEMENT: Buprenorphine has unique and favorable pharmacological properties that make it useful in a variety of clinical scenarios. It has been recommended to consider buprenorphine first-line opioid for chronic pain, especially in the elderly as it may be associated with less cognitive impairment, falls, sexual dysfunction, and sarcopenia when compared with schedule II opioids. It may be useful in patients with comorbid substance use disorder or non-medical opioid use, as there is less risk of misuse, euphoria and it may improve mood. When used to treat opioid use disorder, the training and waiver was recently waived for licensed practitioners with a DEA and any provider may prescribe buprenorphine. For many reasons outlined in this article, the popularity of using buprenorphine for analgesia continues to grow and a practitioner should consider this as an excellent and safe option for chronic pain.

Creating a Palliative Care Clinic for Patients with Cancer Pain and Substance Use Disorder.

BACKGROUND: Opioids are a first-line treatment for severe cancer pain. However, clinicians may be reluctant to prescribe opioids for patients with concurrent substance use disorders (SUD) or clinical concerns about non-prescribed substance use. MEASURES: Patient volume, 60-day retention rate, and use of sublingual buprenorphine to treat opioid use disorder. INTERVENTION: We created the Palliative Harm Reduction and Resiliency Clinic, a palliative care clinic founded on harm reduction principles and including formal collaboration with addiction psychiatry. OUTCOMES: During the first 18 months, patient volume increased steadily; 70% of patients had at least one subsequent visit within 60 days of the initial appointment; and buprenorphine was prescribed for 55% of patients with opioid use disorder. CONCLUSIONS/LESSONS LEARNED: The formal collaboration with addiction psychiatry and the integration of harm reduction principles and practices into ambulatory palliative care improved our ability to provide treatment to a previously underserved patient population with high symptom burden.

Oxycodone Extended-Release Capsule Utilization for Pain Management in a Cancer Palliative Care Clinic: A Retrospective Review.

Xtampza ER™, an oxycodone extended-release capsule (OERC), was the first long-acting opioid to feature abuse-deterrent properties and various routes of administration without pharmacokinetic alterations. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate changes in reported pain scores after initiation of or rotation to OERC from a previous opioid.  Baseline scores were from patients' outpatient visits immediately before starting OERC and were compared to those at the next two follow-up visits. Secondary objectives identified variables that influenced pain scores. Methods included screening for cancer patients with outpatient OERC prescriptions seen in the palliative care clinic. Eighty-two charts were reviewed with 66 included. Overall mean pain scores at both follow-ups were lower than those at baseline (-0.7 ± 2.1; -1.1 ± 2.4). Results were statistically significant between first and second-reported pain scores versus baseline (p = 0.009; 0.012) but clinically insignificant, defined as a ≥ 2-point change in numeric pain scores. Most patients discontinued OERC at the first or second follow-up (35; 53%), and 12.1% of patients who started OERC were prescribed OERC at the end of the study. There were no significant variables identified to influence pain scores either statistically or clinically. Further studies are needed to determine the long-term efficacy and safety in cancer palliative-care patients.

Top Ten Tips Palliative Care Clinicians Should Know About Buprenorphine.

Pain management in palliative care (PC) is becoming more complex as patients survive longer with life-limiting illnesses and population-wide trends involving opioid misuse become more common in serious illness. Buprenorphine, a generally safe partial mu-opioid receptor agonist, has been shown to be effective for both pain management and opioid use disorder. It is critical that PC clinicians become comfortable with indications for its use, strategies for initiation while understanding risks and benefits. This article, written by a team of PC and addiction-trained specialists, including physicians, nurse practitioners, social workers, and a pharmacist, offers 10 tips to demystify buprenorphine use in serious illness.

A Survey on Opioid Tapering Practices, Policies, and Perspectives by Pain and Palliative Care Pharmacists.

Opioid tapering is an essential clinical tool to utilize for a variety of reasons, including safety and analgesic optimization. The need for individualized regimens reveals a corresponding need for healthcare providers who can actively manage patients throughout the process. Pharmacists have taken on an integral role for achieving success in opioid tapering. This survey was conducted to describe the current opioid tapering practices of pain and palliative care pharmacists. A Qualtrics survey was offered to the Society of Pain and Palliative Care Pharmacist members. The majority (87%) indicated they specialized in pain management. Almost all respondents (98%) reported providing tapering recommendations and 82% reported being involved with patient monitoring throughout the taper. The majority (multiple responses could be chosen) noted that the indication for initiating an opioid taper was due to abuse/misuse (91%), reduced overall efficacy (89%), and adverse drug reactions (78%). The most common follow-up intervals during tapering were weekly (15%), every 2 weeks (22%), and every 4 weeks (44%). This practice-based survey, though small, showed that pharmacists in pain management and palliative care are actively involved in opioid tapering. This survey will hopefully serve as a foundation for continuing research into opioid tapering and the pharmacist's role therein.

Novel Use of Atomized Intravenous Ketamine Solution for the Topical Treatment of Intranasal Mucositis Pain: A Case Report.

Context: Treatment-induced mucositis commonly affects cancer patients, and ketamine oral rinse solution has shown efficacy for refractory pain. Although intranasal ketamine as systemic therapy has previously been studied, there are no reports on intranasal ketamine spray for topical pain treatment. Objective: To present the novel use of atomized intravenous ketamine solution for topical treatment of sinonasal mucositis pain. Patient case: A patient with sinonasal undifferentiated carcinoma presented with refractory treatment-related intranasal mucositis pain. Following initiation of atomized ketamine solution delivered topically into the nostrils, pain improved, and opioid use decreased. After dose adjustment for confusion, the patient continued ketamine therapy for several weeks with good effect. Conclusion: Atomized ketamine solution delivered intranasally may be a safe and effective topical treatment for mucositis pain of the sinuses. Interpretation of safety of the initial dosing used was affected by several confounding factors. However, a reduced dose appeared efficacious and was well tolerated.

Transdermal Buprenorphine Use for Pain Management in Palliative Care.

Cancer related pain is prevalent among patients with a cancer diagnosis, occurring from the tumor itself or as a result of treatment. Many patients require opioid therapy to manage pain and providers must balance efficacy with side effects. Transdermal buprenorphine (TDB) has shown promise for pain management, however, the maximum dose available in the US is considered low, resulting in doubts of efficacy. This study set out to assess if the patch strengths available in the US (5-20 mcg/hour) are able to provide analgesia for patients with cancer in a palliative medicine clinic. This retrospective chart review analyzed patient charts for outpatient TDB use within a palliative medicine clinic in the United States. Patients had to have a follow up visit with the clinic in order to be included. Sixty-eight patients were included for analysis with 54 (79%) continuing at least 28 days and 37 (54%) continuing for at least 84 days. The median change in pain score was 0, though 25 (46%) of patients reported a decrease of 1 or more points at the first follow up. TDB is a viable option for cancer related pain for select patients, demonstrated by duration of use and stable reporting of pain.

Hospital Opioid Requirements Following Continuation Versus Discontinuation of Buprenorphine for Addiction - A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Evidence guiding inpatient management of buprenorphine is lacking-this retrospective cohort study evaluated the clinical impact of hospital continuation versus discontinuation of buprenorphine at an academic medical center. The primary outcome was inpatient oral morphine equivalents (OME). Secondary outcomes included patient pain levels, functional assessment, and hospital length of stay. One hundred thirty-one patients (74 continued buprenorphine, 57 discontinued) were included in the analysis. Median OME were significantly lower among patients continued on buprenorphine versus discontinued (11 mg vs 103 mg, p < 0.001), as was maximum 24-hour opioid utilization (60 mg vs 240 mg, p < 0.001) and 24-hour pre-discharge utilization (10 mg vs 128 mg, p < 0.001). Median pain levels were similar between groups at the time of admission (8 in each group, p = 0.48), discharge (7 in each group, p = 0.26), and over the first 7 days of hospitalization (7 vs 8, p = 0.08). Hospital length of stay was similar between groups (5 days in each group, p > 0.99). Failure to reinitiate buprenorphine occurred in 31/57 patients (54.4%) in the discontinuation group. Hospital buprenorphine continuation is associated with reduced opioid requirements, while not significantly impacting pain levels, functionality, or length of admission. Failure to reinitiate buprenorphine was common and may have negative implications for addiction treatment.

State Legislation to Prevent Diversion of Opioids in Hospice Programs: A Deeper Look Into Ohio Law.

The problem of opioid diversion and its contribution to the opioid epidemic are well known nationally, existing even within hospice care. Proper disposal of opioids may be a critical factor in reducing diversion. In 2014, Ohio implemented legislation requiring a hospice employee to destroy or witness disposal of all unused opioids within a patient's plan of care. The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of Ohio Revised Code 3712.062 on hospice programs' policies and procedures to prevent opioid diversion in the home. Directors of Ohio-licensed hospices were surveyed to assess the percentage of programs with a written policy in place for disposal of opioids and to calculate a compliance score based on responses to survey questions assessing compliance with legislation components. Fifty-two surveys were completed (39.4%). All survey respondents reported having a written policy in place. A 95.5% average compliance score was calculated, with the largest disparity occurring with timing of opioid disposal. While Ohio Revised Code 3712.062 requires opioid disposal at the time of patient's death or when no longer needed by the patient, only 84% of respondents report disposing opioids upon discontinuation. Overall, a high compliance rate was seen among hospice programs indicating such regulation is manageable to meet.

Incidence of hydromorphone-induced neuroexcitation in hospice patients.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To date, there are no known published studies that prospectively followed hospice patients receiving hydromorphone to evaluate the development of hydromorphone-induced neuroexcitation (HINE). The first objective of this study was to determine the incidence of HINE. The second objective was to identify factors influencing the presence or absence of HINE symptoms in hospice patients. METHODS: This was a noninterventional, prospective study. This study population included hospice patients 18 years of age or older who were admitted to one of two Nathan Adelson Hospice inpatient units in Las Vegas, Nevada, and were initiated on a scheduled regimen of hydromorphone. A total of 156 patients were enrolled and analyzed in this study. Data collection was performed by the study investigators using a standard data tracking form, including hospice diagnosis, gender, renal function, hydromorphone regimen, and whether or not the patient experienced neuroexcitatory symptoms. Data collection occurred from November 2010 to March 2011. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Based on the data collected in this study, it appears that the likelihood of HINE does increase with larger doses, increasing age, increasing serum creatinine, and the presence of malignant neoplasm. However, after adjusting for the variables in the logistic regression model, diagnosis of malignant neoplasm was not a significant predictor of HINE. Future studies may focus on evaluating metabolite levels, such as hydromorphone-3-glucuronide (H3G), in patients developing HINE symptoms. This may help to determine if the metabolites of opioids, such as H3G, are involved in the development of the neurotoxic symptoms.

An integrated course in pain management and palliative care bridging the basic sciences and pharmacy practice.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the development of an integrated pain and palliative care course and to investigate the long-term effectiveness of the course during doctor of pharmacy (PharmD) students' advanced pharmacy practice experiences (APPEs) and in their practice after graduation. DESIGN: Roseman University College of Pharmacy faculty developed a 3-week elective course in pain and palliative care by integrating relevant clinical and pharmaceutical sciences. Instructional strategies included lectures, team and individual activities, case studies, and student presentations. ASSESSMENT: Students who participated in the course in 2010 and 2011 were surveyed anonymously to gain their perception about the class as well as the utility of the course during their APPEs and in their everyday practice. Traditional and nontraditional assessment of students confirmed that the learning outcomes objectives were achieved. CONCLUSIONS: Students taking the integrated course on pain management and palliative care achieved mastery of the learning outcome objectives. Surveys of students and practicing pharmacists who completed the course showed that the learning experience as well as retention was improved with the integrated mode of teaching. Integrating basic and clinical sciences in therapeutic courses is an effective learning strategy.