Opioid Tapering/Detoxification Protocols, A Compendium: Narrative Review.

OBJECTIVES: The opioid epidemic has put pressure on clinicians to taper their chronic pain patients (CPPs) from opioids. This has resulted in rapid or forced tapers and opioid discontinuation. Partially responsible is lack of information on how to taper (tapering protocols).The objectives of this narrative review were then the following: compile all the published opioid tapering/detoxification protocols from the pain/drug rehabilitation/psychiatric literature whether for inpatient or outpatient use; organize these into general types; compare the types for advantages/disadvantages for use by a clinician in an outpatient setting; and answer some commonly asked questions relating to opioid tapering. METHODS: Relevant references were identified by a search strategy utilizing the terms tapering, tapering protocols, detoxification, detoxification protocols, withdrawal, dependence, addiction, and drug rehabilitation. These were explored with the term opioids. Identified abstract were reviewed for any study relating to the objectives of this review. Those studies were then included in this review. As this is a narrative review, no quality ratings of these references were performed. RESULTS: Of 1,922 abstracts identified by this search strategy, 301 were reviewed in detail for potential inclusion. Of these, 104 were utilized in this review. Nine types of opioid tapering protocols were identified and compared in tabular form. Twenty-two questions in reference to opioid tapering were addressed. CONCLUSIONS: Based on this review, the protocol utilizing the opioid of current use is the simplest to use as it requires no rotation to another opioid and thereby avoids rotation errors. It also has behavior advantages.

Can Patient Expectations of Returning to Work Documented Before, During, or at the End of Treatment Predict Actual Return to Work Post-treatment? An Evidence-Based Structured Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: There is significant evidence that patient expectations can impact their treatment outcomes. The hypothesis of this systematic review was then the following. There will be significant consistent evidence as specified by the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research (AHCPR) guidelines that chronic pain patient (CPP) expectations for returning to work documented before, during, or at the end of treatment will predict actual return to work post-treatment. METHODS: Of 316 references, 12 studies fulfilled inclusion criteria. These studies analyzed expectations of returning to work documented before, during, or at the end of treatment and utilized these for predicting return to work post-treatment. Relevant aspects of these studies were abstracted into tabular form for numerical analysis. All studies were rated independently by two reviewers for quality. The percentage of the 12 studies supporting the hypothesis was determined. This was then utilized to determine an AHCPR guideline rating for consistency. RESULTS: No studies had a rejection quality score. All studies were type 4. The hypothesis was supported by 91.6% of the studies. According to the AHCPR guidelines, this translated into an A rating: consistent findings from multiple type 4 studies. CONCLUSIONS: CPP expectations of returning to work as documented before, during, or at the end of treatment may predict actual return to work post-treatment.

Does Opioid Tapering in Chronic Pain Patients Result in Improved Pain or Same Pain vs Increased Pain at Taper Completion? A Structured Evidence-Based Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: To support or refute the hypothesis that opioid tapering in chronic pain patients (CPPs) improves pain or maintains the same pain level by taper completion but does not increase pain. METHODS: Of 364 references, 20 fulfilled inclusion/exclusion criteria. These studies were type 3 and 4 (not controlled) but reported pre/post-taper pain levels. Characteristics of the studies were abstracted into tabular form for numerical analysis. Studies were rated independently by two reviewers for quality. The percentage of studies supporting the above hypothesis was determined. RESULTS: No studies had a rejection quality score. Combining all studies, 2,109 CPPs were tapered. Eighty percent of the studies reported that by taper completion pain had improved. Of these, 81.25% demonstrated this statistically. In 15% of the studies, pain was the same by taper completion. One study reported that by taper completion, 97% of the CPPs had improved or the same pain, but CPPs had worse pain in 3%. As such, 100% of the studies supported the hypothesis. Applying the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research Levels of Evidence Guidelines to this result produced an A consistency rating. CONCLUSIONS: There is consistent type 3 and 4 study evidence that opioid tapering in CPPs reduces pain or maintains the same level of pain. However, these studies represented lower levels of evidence and were not designed to test the hypothesis, with the evidence being marginal in quality with large amounts of missing data. These results then primarily reveal the need for controlled studies (type 2) to address this hypothesis.

Chronic Pain Types Differ in Their Reported Prevalence of Post -Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and There Is Consistent Evidence That Chronic Pain Is Associated with PTSD: An Evidence-Based Structured Systematic Review.

Objectives: The hypotheses of this systematic review were the following: 1) Prevalence of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) will differ between various types of chronic pain (CP), and 2) there will be consistent evidence that CP is associated with PTSD. Methods: Of 477 studies, 40 fulfilled the inclusion/exclusion criteria of this review and were grouped according to the type of CP. The reported prevalence of PTSD for each grouping was determined by aggregating all the patients in all the studies in that group. Additionally all patients in all groupings were combined. Percentage of studies that had found an association between CP and PTSD was determined. The consistency of the evidence represented by the percentage of studies finding an association was rated according to the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research guidelines. Results: Grouping PTSD prevalence differed ranging from a low of 0.69% for chronic low back pain to a high of 50.1% in veterans. Prevalence in the general population with CP was 9.8%. Of 19 studies, 16 had found an association between CP and PTSD (84.2%) generating an A consistency rating (consistent multiple studies). Three of the groupings had an A or B (generally consistent) rating. The veterans grouping received a C (finding inconsistent) rating. Conclusion: The results of this systematic review confirmed the hypotheses of this review.

At Completion of a Multidisciplinary Treatment Program, Are Psychophysical Variables Associated with a VAS Improvement of 30% or More, a Minimal Clinically Important Difference, or an Absolute VAS Score Improvement of 1.5 cm or More?

OBJECTIVES: Objectives were to determine at completion of a multidisciplinary pain program: 1) what percentage of chronic low back pain (CLBP) patients had improved at 30% or more (minimal clinically important difference [MCID]) and by 1.5 cm or more (minimal important change [MIC]) on the visual analog scale (VAS) and 2) whether that improvement is associated with pain matching (PM), pain threshold (PTRE), and pain tolerance (PTOL) improvements. METHODS: One hundred and six CLBP patients had admission and discharge scores for VAS, PM, PTRE, and PTOL. Improvement was determined by absolute, MCID, and MIC VAS improvement. Logistic regression analysis controlling for age, gender, race, education, psychoactive substance dependence, and depression was utilized to develop models for the dependent variables of improvement of overall VAS; of MCID of 50% or more; and of MIC with PM, PTOL, and PTRE as independent variables. RESULTS: Thirty-two percent and 35% of the CLBP patients were at MCID and MIC, respectively, at discharge (68% and 65% not at MCID and MIC, respectively), and 54.7% were improved overall. Of the improved patients, 59% were at MCID and 63.7% at MIC. PM was associated with overall VAS improvement, while PTRE and PM were associated with MCID improvement. MIC and 50% or above models could not be estimated. LIMITATIONS: The VAS was treated as a ratio scale. CONCLUSIONS: A significant percentage of CLBP patients were at MCID and at MIC at completion of multidisciplinary treatment. PM was associated with overall VAS improvement, while PTRE and PM were associated with MCID.

The Perception of Being a Burden in Acute and Chronic Pain Patients Is Associated with Affirmation of Different Types of Suicidality.

OBJECTIVES: The perception of being a burden or self-perceived burden (SPB) is associated with suicide ideation in chronic pain patients (CPPs). The objective of this study was to determine if SPB is associated with five types of suicidality (wish to die, active suicide ideation, presence of suicide plan, history of suicide attempts, and preference for death over being disabled) in CPPs and acute pain patients (APPs). METHODS: Affirmation of SPB was statistically compared between community nonpatients without pain (CNPWP), APPs, and CPPs. APPs and CPPs who had affirmed any of the five types of suicidality were compared statistically for affirmation of SPB. Hierarchical regression analysis was utilized to determine the significance of SPB in predicting each of the five types of suicidality in APPs and CPPs controlling for age, gender, race, education status, and two types of measures of depression (current depression and vegetative depression). RESULTS: APPs and CPPs were statistically more likely to affirm SPB than CNPWPs and CPPs were more likely than APPs to do so. There were no differences between APPs and CPPs in affirming SPB in APPs and CPPs who had affirmed any of the five types of suicidality. In CPPs, SPB predicted each type of suicidality in a significant fashion utilizing both types of depression measures. For APPs, SPB predicted each type of suicidality in a significant fashion except for history of suicide attempt controlling for vegetative depression. CONCLUSIONS: SPB is associated with the vast majority of different types of suicidality in APPs and CPPs.

The pain--suffering association, a review.

OBJECTIVE: This review wished to determine the reported prevalence of suffering in various patient diagnostic groups and examine the evidence for the association of pain and suffering. DESIGN/SETTING: Twenty-four studies fulfilled inclusion-exclusion criteria. They were divided into the following groups: advanced cancer/terminal illness/hospice patients (AC/TI/H) (7 studies); hastened death/assisted suicide/euthanasia patients (HD/AS/E) (14 studies); noncancer (NC) patients (3 studies). No chronic nonmalignant pain (CNMP) suffering studies fulfilled inclusion-exclusion criteria of this review. The reported prevalence of suffering for each study was abstracted and the overall percentage of sufferers in each grouping calculated. For those studies that provided a statistical relationship between pain and suffering information was abstracted for whether these studies supported/did not support the association of pain and suffering. A vote counting method was utilized to determine the overall percentage of studies supporting/not supporting this association. The consistency of this data for supporting this association was then rated by Agency for Health Care Research and Quality guidelines. RESULTS: The prevalence of suffering in each grouping was as follows: AC/IT/H 45.7%; HD/AS/E 81.9%; NC 19.2%; and all groupings combined 59.9%. AC/TI/H and all groupings combined received an A rating (consistent evidence multiple studies for a statistical relationship between suffering and pain). HD/AS/E received a C (evidence which is inconsistent). For NC there were not enough studies for a consistency rating. CONCLUSIONS: The above results indicate a consistent association between suffering and pain in some patient groups. Studies addressing suffering are needed in CNPM patients.

Prevalence comparisons of somatic and psychiatric symptoms between community nonpatients without pain, acute pain patients, and chronic pain patients.

OBJECTIVES: Somatic/psychiatric symptoms are frequently found in chronic pain patients (CPPs). The objectives of this study were to determine 1) which somatic/psychiatric symptoms are more commonly found in acute pain patients (APPs) and CPPs vs community nonpatients without pain (CNPWPs) and 2) if somatic/psychiatric symptom prevalence differs between APPs and CPPs. DESIGN: The above groups were compared statistically for endorsement of 15 symptoms: fatigue, numbness/tingling, dizziness, difficulty opening/closing mouth, muscle weakness, difficulty staying asleep, depression, muscle tightness, nervousness, irritability, memory, falling, nausea, concentration, and headaches. RESULTS: After controlling for age, gender, and level of pain, APPs and CPPs had a statistically significantly greater prevalence (at a P < 0.01 level) for 11 and 13 symptoms, respectively, vs CNPWPs. After controlling for age, gender, and level of pain, CPPs had a statistically significantly greater prevalence (at a P < 0.01 level) for eight symptoms vs APPs. Symptoms were highly correlated in both APPs and CPPs. CONCLUSIONS: CPPs are characterized to a significantly greater extent than comparison groups by somatic/psychiatric symptoms that are highly intercorrelated. This has implications for clinical practice and future research.

Exploring the Relationship of Three Medical Entitlement Beliefs and Psychiatric/Psychological Variables for Acute and Chronic Pain Patients.

OBJECTIVES: The belief in medical care entitlement has recently resulted in major changes in the medical system in the United States. The objectives of this study were the following: to compare endorsement of three medical entitlement beliefs (I deserve the best medical care no matter what the cost [BMC], I am entitled to all of the medical care I want at no charge [NC], I shouldn't have to wait to see my doctors [W]) in community nonpatients without pain (CNPWP), acute pain patients (APPs), and chronic pain patients (CPPs) and to develop predictor models for these beliefs in APPs and CPPs. DESIGN: CNPWP, APPs, and CPPs were compared statistically for frequency of endorsement of each belief. All available variables were utilized in logistic regression models to predict each belief in APPs and CPPs. Those affirming/nonaffirming each belief were compared by t-test for affirmation of narcissism, dependency, and antisocial practices on three scales from established inventories. RESULTS: CPPs were significantly more likely than APPs to endorse BMC. No other comparisons were significant. The logistic regression models identified variables that related to narcissism, anger, doctor dissatisfaction, depression, and anxiety, which entered the models for both APPs and CPPs for some beliefs. Those APPs and CPPs who affirmed the beliefs of NC and W were more likely than their counterparts to affirm antisocial practices, but not narcissism or dependency. CONCLUSIONS: Patient medical entitlement beliefs may be related to some psychiatric/psychological issues.

The pain suicidality association: a narrative review.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this narrative review was to examine recent evidence and, when necessary, past evidence on the association between pain and suicidality. DESIGN: Fifty-eight research reports were found on this topic, which had not previously been reviewed. These reports were divided into groups by whether they addressed suicide ideation (SI), suicide attempts (SAs), or suicide completion (SC), and what population they represented (acute pain patients [APPs], chronic pain patients [CPPs], other than APPs/CPPs) and whether they controlled for relevant confounders. Information as to whether the results of these studies supported/did not support the association of pain and suicidality was abstracted. For each group of studies (above), a vote counting method was utilized to determine the overall percentage of studies supporting/not supporting the association of pain and suicidality. According to this percentage, the consistency of the data supporting this association was rated according to Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality guidelines. RESULTS: The following groups of studies received an A consistency rating (consistent evidence from multiple studies): SI, SA, and SC for other than APPs/CPPs; and SI, SA, and SC for CPP prevalence greater than an appropriate control group. Also, a subgroup of the SI, SA, and SC studies for other than APPs/CPPs had controlled for behavioral issues (potential confounders). These three subgroups also received an A consistency rating. The 58 studies also identified a number of new predictor variables for SI, SA, and SC in CPPs. CONCLUSIONS: These studies solidify the evidence for an association between pain and SI, SA, and SC in both CPPs and other than APPs/CPPs.

What is the evidence that neuropathic pain is present in chronic low back pain and soft tissue syndromes? An evidence-based structured review.

OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this evidence-based review were to review the evidence for whether neuropathic pain (NP) is associated with chronic low back pain (CLBP) and soft tissue syndromes (STS), and review the reported prevalence percentages for NP within these syndromes. METHODS: Of 816 reports, 11 addressed the diagnosis of NP in CLBP and five of NP in STS. Studies were grouped by the method of arrival at an NP diagnosis, e.g., physical examination, type of NP inventory utilized, etc. The reported prevalence of NP was determined by aggregating all the patients in all the studies in each grouping. Similarly, the reported prevalence of NP within CLBP and STS was determined by aggregating all the patients with NP from all the studies in those groups. Each study was independently rated by two raters according to 11 quality criteria generating a quality score. The strength and consistency (SAC) of the evidence represented by each grouping was rated according to Agency for Health Care Policy and Research guidelines. RESULTS: In each grouping, 100% of the studies reported some prevalence of NP (none reported zero prevalence). Aggregated NP prevalence for CLBP was 36.6% (SAC level A [consistent multiple studies]) and for STS 41.1% (SAC level A). There was significant variation in prevalence according to the method utilized to diagnose NP. CONCLUSION: There is consistent evidence by all methods that NP is present in CLBP and STS. Reported prevalence percentages by all methods are substantial. This has significant implications for the treatment of CLBP and STS.

Does pain interfere with antidepressant depression treatment response and remission in patients with depression and pain? An evidence-based structured review.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this evidence-based structured review was to determine if there is consistent evidence that pain interferes with achieving antidepressant treatment response/remission of depression in patients with depression and pain. METHODS: After exclusion criteria were applied, of 2,801 studies/reports, 17 studies addressed this question. They were sorted into the four hypotheses outlined herein after. The percentage of studies supporting/not supporting each hypothesis was calculated. The strength and consistency of the evidence for each hypothesis were rated according to the Agency for Health Care Research and Quality (AHRQ) guidelines. RESULTS: For the first hypothesis (pretreatment pain levels will predict antidepressant depression response), nine out of 10 (90%) studies supported it. For the second hypothesis (treatment decreases in pain will be associated with antidepressant depression response), two out of two (100%) studies supported it. For the third hypothesis (pretreatment pain levels will predict antidepressant depression remission), six out of six (100%) studies supported it. For the fourth hypothesis (treatment decreases in pain will be associated with antidepressant depression remission), five out of five (100%) supported it. Utilizing these percentages and AHRQ guidelines, hypotheses 1, 3, and 4 received an A rating for consistency of studies in supporting them. A consistency rating for hypothesis 2 could not be generated because of too few studies in that group. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent evidence was found that antidepressant treatment of depression in patients with depression and pain can be negatively impacted by pain for achieving depression response/remission. However, the overall number of studies supporting each hypothesis was small. In addition, several potential confounders of the results of this study were identified.

Exploration of affirmation of childhood molestation (sexual abuse) in chronic pain patients, acute pain patients, community patients with pain and community nonpatients without pain.

OBJECTIVES: To further explore the controversy as to whether childhood molestation is associated with chronic pain in adulthood. DESIGN: Community nonpatients without pain (CNPWP), community patients with pain (CPWP), acute pain patients (APPs), and chronic pain patients (CPPs) were compared for endorsement of affirmation of childhood molestation by chi-square. Logistic regression was utilized to predict affirmation in male and female CPPs. RESULTS: A significantly higher percentage of male APPs affirmed molestation versus CNPWP and CPWP. No other comparisons were statistically significant for males. For females, no comparisons were significant. For male CPPs, the behavior health inventory-2 (BHI-2) survivor of violence scale and 1 item from this scale predicted affirmation. The following BHI-2 scales and items predicted affirmation for female CPPs: muscular bracing and survivor of violence scales; the item "I have been a victim of many sexual attacks"; and the item "My father was kind and loving to me when I was growing up" (scored opposite direction). CONCLUSIONS: In female PWCP, the prevalence of childhood molestation is not greater than in a number of unique comparison groups. Unique predictors of childhood molestation are yet to be identified.

The prevalence of smokers within chronic pain patients and highest pain levels versus comparison groups.

OBJECTIVES.: The objectives of this study were to (1) compare the prevalence of smoking within chronic pain patients (CPPs) to community non-patients without pain (CNPWP), community patients with pain (CPWP), and acute pain patients (APPs); and (2) compare smokers to nonsmokers within CPPs, APPs, and CPWP for highest pain level. DESIGN.: CNPWP, CPWP, APPs, and CPPs were compared to each other for smoking status (nonsmoker, less than one pack per day, one pack/day or more, any amount per day). Within CPWP, APPs, and CPPs, smokers were also compared to nonsmokers by t-test for highest reported pain level. For both analyses, sub-analyses were performed controlling for age or gender, or race or education. RESULTS.: Utilizing all available patients, the prevalence of smokers within CPPs was significantly greater vs each of the comparison groups (CNPWP, CPWP, APPs). In the sub-analyses, only CPPs who were 38 or younger or male or White, or had some college or above were at greater risk than CPWP for smoking one pack or greater per day. CPP smokers were not significantly more likely than nonsmokers to have higher pain, and this was confirmed in the sub-analyses. CONCLUSIONS.: The prevalence of smokers could be significantly greater within CPPs vs CPWP. CPPs who smoke do not have higher levels of pain than nonsmoking CPPs.

Is there significant correlation between self-reported low back pain visual analogue scores and low back pain scores determined by pressure pain induction matching?

The objective of this study was to determine whether self-reported visual analogue scale (VAS) low back pain (LBP) scores are valid against matched psychophysically induced pressure pain scores. Two hundred thirty-six chronic LBP patients (some with neck pain) reported their LBP and neck pain scores on a VAS immediately before psychophysical pressure pain induction used to determine pain threshold (PTHRE), pain tolerance (PTOL), and a psychophysical pressure pain score which matched (PMAT) their current LBP. Pearson Product-Moment correlation coefficients were calculated between reported VAS neck scores, reported VAS LBP scores, and the psychophysically determined LBP PMAT scores. The PMAT scores were calculated utilizing PTOL only and both PTOL and PTHRE. There was a significant correlation between the LBP PMAT scores and the reported LBP VAS scores for both types of psychophysical LBP PMAT score calculations; however, there were insignificant correlations between the LBP PMAT scores and reported neck VAS scores. Chronic LBP patients can match their self-reported VAS LBP scores to psychophysically determined LBP PMAT scores. As such, self-reported VAS chronic LBP scores appear to be valid against one type of psychophysical measurement.

Is smoking associated with alcohol-drug dependence in patients with pain and chronic pain patients? An evidence-based structured review.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine if there is consistent evidence for smoking to be considered a red flag for development of opioid dependence during opioid exposure in patients with pain and chronic pain patients (CPPs). METHODS: Six hundred and twenty-three references were found that addressed the areas of smoking, pain, and drug-alcohol dependence. Fifteen studies remained after exclusion criteria were applied and sorted into four groupings addressing four hypotheses: patients with pain and CPPs who smoke are more likely than their nonsmoking counterparts to use opioids, require higher opioid doses, be drug-alcohol dependent, and demonstrate aberrant drug-taking behaviors (ADTBs). Each study was characterized by the type of study it represented according to the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research (AHCPR) guidelines and independently rated by two raters according to 13 quality criteria to generate a quality score. The percentage of studies in each grouping supporting/not supporting each hypothesis was calculated. The strength and consistency of the evidence in each grouping was rated by the AHCPR guidelines. RESULTS: In each grouping, 100% of the studies supported the hypothesis for that grouping. The strength and consistency of the evidence was rated as A (consistent multiple studies) for the first hypothesis and as B (generally consistent) for the other. CONCLUSIONS: There is limited consistent indirect evidence that smoking status in patients with pain and CPPs is associated with alcohol-drug and opioid dependence. Smoking status could be a red flag for opioid-dependence development on opioid exposure.

Exploration of the relationship between disability perception, preference for death over disability, and suicidality in patients with acute and chronic pain.

HYPOTHESIS: Passive, active, and historical suicidality are associated with preference for death over disability. DESIGN: Community nonpatients without pain, community patients with pain, and patients with acute and chronic pain were compared for endorsement of disability perception and preference for death over disability. Phi correlations and chi-square analyses were calculated between preference for death over disability and six suicidality items representing passive, active, and historical suicidality. Logistic regression was used to predict preference for death over disability in patients with acute and chronic pain. RESULTS: For patients with acute and chronic pain, endorsement of preference for death over disability correlated significantly with all six suicidality items. The logistic regression models identified the following variables as predictors for preference for death over disability in patients with acute pain: the Behavior Health Inventory (BHI 2) family dysfunction scale, history of wanting to die, and disability perception. For patients with chronic pain, predictors were the BHI 2 Borderline scale, history of wanting to die, treated fairly by family item, frequent suicide ideation, people I trust turn on me item, and disability perception. Preference for death over disability was a statistically significant predictor in patients with chronic pain for disability perception, recent suicide ideation, having a suicidal plan, and a history of wanting to die but was not a significant predictor for any suicide items in patients with acute pain. CONCLUSION: Preference for death over disability is associated with passive and active suicide ideation and historical suicidality in patients with chronic pain.

Predictors of homicide-suicide affirmation in acute and chronic pain patients.

OBJECTIVES: 1) Determine and compare prevalence for homicide-suicide (H-S) affirmation in community non-patients (N=478), community patients (N=158), acute pain patients (APPs; N=326), and chronic pain patients (CPPs; N=341); and 2) Develop H-S predictor models in APPs and CPPs. DESIGN: A large set of items containing the H-S item was administered to the above groups, who were compared statistically for H-S endorsement. APPs and CPPs affirming the H-S item were compared with those not affirming on all available variables including the Battery for Health Improvement (BHI 2) with significant variables (P≤ 0.001) utilized in predictor models for H-S in APPs and CPPs. SETTING: Community plus rehabilitation facilities. RESULTS: The above population groups affirmed the H-S item according to the following percentages: healthy community 1.88%, community patients 3.16%, rehabilitation patients without pain 3.64%, rehabilitation AAPs 3.99%, and rehabilitation CPPs 4.40%. For both APPs and CPPs, the H-S item was significantly correlated with some suicidality items and some homicide items. The model for APPs identified "having a suicide plan" as being predictive of H-S affirmation. For CPPs, the items of having thoughts of revenge killing, being motivated to seek revenge without any verbal warning, and the Doctor Dissatisfaction Scale of the BHI 2 predicted H-S affirmation. The APPs model classified 96% of the APPs correctly, while the CPPs model classified 97% of the CPPs correctly. These predictor rates, however, were no better than the base rate. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of H-S affirmation within APPs and CPPs is not insignificant. The APPs predictor model points to a close association between H-S affirmation and suicidality. The CPPs model indicates that there is a close association between H-S affirmation, and anger/hostility and anger directed at physicians. These results, however, should not lead to the belief that CPPs are at greater risk for actual H-S completion for the following reasons: 1) H-S is an extremely rare event; and 2) predictive validity of the H-S item for actual H-S completion has not been determined.

Are psychoactive substance (opioid)-dependent chronic pain patients hyperalgesic?

OBJECTIVES: One indirect line of evidence for opioid-induced hyperalgesia (OIH) in humans is decreased pain thresholds (PTREs) and tolerances (PTOLs) in opioid addicts on opioids. There are a number of such studies in opioid maintained addicts, but no such studies in chronic pain patients (CPPs) with current opioid addiction. The objective of this study was to determine if this group demonstrates hyperalgesia. METHODS: CPPs were subdivided into those with psychoactive substance (opioid dependence) (PSOD) (n=38) (addicted) and those taking opioids but without PSOD (n=198) (not addicted). A group of opioid-free non-CPPs served as a control group (n=36). PTREs/PTOLs were determined in each group by pressure pain stimulation in both the right and left index fingers. PTREs/PTOLs were compared by analysis of variance among the three groups controlling for sex/age and by analysis of covariance between the PSOD CPPs and non-PSOD CPPs controlling for duration of pain and visual analog scale pain level over the last 24 hours. RESULTS: The PSOD and non-PSOD CPPs had significantly lower PTREs and PTOLs vs. the control group, ie, were hyperalgesic. However, they were not significantly different from each other. CONCLUSIONS: This study contributes to the human OIH literature. However, because of the potential confounders in this study, the issue of OIH in humans remains unresolved.

Exploration of anger constructs in acute and chronic pain patients vs. community patients.

OBJECTIVES: (1) Determine and compare prevalence of forms of anger (FOA; anger, hostility, aggression, anger-in, anger-out, chronic anger) in community nonpatients (n=478), community patients (n=158), acute pain patients (APPs; n=326), chronic pain patients (CPPs; n=341); and (2) develop FOA predictor models in APPs and CPPs. DESIGN: A large set of items containing the FOA items was administered to the above groups, who were compared statistically for FOA endorsement. APPs and CPPs affirming the anger and chronic anger items were compared with those not affirming on all available variables including the Battery for Health Improvement (BHI-2) with significant variables (P≤0.001) utilized in predictor models for anger and chronic anger in APPs and CPPs. Setting community plus rehabilitation facilities. RESULTS: FOA affirmation ranged from 8.28% for chronic anger in nonpatients to 37.54% for anger in CPPs. Only CPPs were more likely to affirm anger (P≤0.04) and chronic anger (P≤0.01) at a significantly higher rate than community patients. In both APPs and CPPs, all FOA items except anger management-in were significantly correlated with other FOA items. For anger and chronic anger for CPPs and APPs, hostility was the strongest predictor. All models predicted anger and chronic anger significantly better than the base rate prediction. CONCLUSION: According to the results of this study anger and chronic anger are more frequently found in CPPs vs. community patients supporting the clinical perception that many CPPs are angry. As such,clinicians should actively screen CPPs for the presence of anger in order to engage these CPPs in anger management treatment.