Finding the Balance Between Reduced Opioid Prescribing and Patient-reported Pain Management Among General Surgery Patients.

OBJECTIVE: To compare patient-reported outcomes before and after implementation of evidence-based, procedure-specific opioid prescribing guidelines. BACKGROUND: The opioid epidemic remains a significant public health issue. Many institutions have responded by reducing opioid prescribing after surgery. However, the impact of this on patient-reported outcomes remains poorly understood. METHODS: Opioid-naïve adults undergoing 12 elective general surgery procedures at a single institution prospectively completed telephone surveys at median 26 days from discharge. Patients were compared before (March 2017-January 2018) and after (May 2019-November 2019) implementation of evidence-based, procedure-specific opioid prescribing guidelines. RESULTS: A total of 603 preguideline and 138 postguideline patients met inclusion criteria and completed surveys. Overall, 60.5% of preguideline and 92.5% of postguideline prescriptions fell within recommendations ( P <0.001), while refill rates were similar (4.5% vs 5.8%, P =0.50). A statistically significant drop in median morphine milligram equivalent prescribed was observed for 9 of 12 procedures (75%). No opioids were prescribed for 16.7% of patients in both cohorts ( P =0.98). While 93.3% of preguideline and 87.7% of postguideline patients were very/somewhat satisfied with their pain control, the proportion of patients who were very/somewhat dissatisfied increased from 4.2% to 9.4% ( P =0.039). CONCLUSIONS: Prescribing guidelines successfully reduced opioid prescribing without increased refill rates. Despite decreased prescribing overall, there was a continued reluctance to prescribe no opioids after surgery. Although most patients experienced good pain control, there remains a subset of patients whose pain is not optimally managed in the era of reduced opioid prescribing.

Opioid prescribing for acute postoperative pain after cutaneous surgery.

BACKGROUND: Little information is available to predict which patients require opioid analgesia following cutaneous surgery. When opioids are indicated, information regarding the optimal opioid agent selection and dosage is lacking. OBJECTIVE: To make recommendations for opioid prescription after cutaneous surgery. METHODS: A PubMed literature search was conducted to review the available literature. Recommendations are presented on the basis of available evidence and the opinion of the authors. RESULTS: Most patients undergoing cutaneous surgery do not require opioid analgesia. For those who do, the duration of pain warranting opioid analgesia is generally less than 36 hours. Opioid refill requests warrant a follow-up visit to ascertain the cause of ongoing pain after excisional procedures. LIMITATIONS: The recommendations are not based on prospective randomized trials. CONCLUSIONS: The presented recommendations for opioid prescription practice are derived from available evidence, recommendations, and expert opinion.

The 2018 Chitranjan S. Ranawat, MD Award: Developing and Implementing a Novel Institutional Guideline Strategy Reduced Postoperative Opioid Prescribing After TKA and THA.

BACKGROUND: Opioid prescription management is challenging for orthopaedic surgeons, and we lack evidence-based guidelines for responsible opioid prescribing. Our institution recently developed opioid prescription guidelines for patients undergoing several common orthopaedic procedures including TKA and THA in an effort to reduce and standardize prescribing patterns. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) How do opioid prescriptions at discharge and 30-day refill rates change in opioid-naïve patients undergoing primary TKA and THA before and after implementation of a novel prescribing guideline strategy? (2) What patient, surgical, and in-hospital factors influence opioid prescription quantity and refill rate? METHODS: New institutional guidelines for patients undergoing TKA and THA recommend a maximum postoperative prescription of 400 oral morphine equivalents (OME), comparable to 50 tablets of 5 mg oxycodone or 80 tablets of 50 mg tramadol. All opioid-naïve patients, defined as those who did not take any opioids within 90 days preceding surgery, undergoing primary TKA and THA at a single tertiary care institution were evaluated from program initiation on August 1, 2017, through December 31, 2017, as the postguideline era cohort. This group (n = 751 patients) was compared with all opioid-naïve patients undergoing TKA and THA from 2016 at the same institution (n = 1822 patients). Some providers were early adopters of the guidelines as they were being developed, which is why January to July 2017 was not evaluated. Patients in the preguideline and postguideline eras were not different in terms of age, sex, race, body mass index, education level, employment status, psychiatric illness, marital status, smoking history, outpatient use of benzodiazepines or gabapentinoids, or diagnoses of diabetes mellitus, peripheral neuropathy, or cancer. The primary outcome assessed was adherence to the new guidelines with a secondary outcome of opioid medication refills ordered within 30 days from any provider. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed with outcomes of guideline compliance and refills and adjusted for demographic, surgical, and patient care factors. Patients were followed for 30 days after surgery and no patients were lost to followup. RESULTS: Median opioid prescription and range of prescriptions decreased in the postguideline era compared with the preguideline era (750 OME, interquartile range [IQR] 575-900 OME versus 388 OME, IQR 350-389; difference of medians = 362 OME; p < 0.001). There was no difference among patients undergoing TKA before and after guideline implementation in terms of the 30-day refill rate (35% [349 of 1011] versus 35% [141 of 399]; p = 0.77); this relationship was similar among patient undergoing THA (16% [129 of 811] versus 17% [61 of 352]; p = 0.55). After controlling for relevant patient-level factors, we found that implementation of an institutional guideline was the strongest factor associated with a prescription of ≤ 400 OME (adjusted odds ratio, 36; 95% confidence interval, 25-52; p < 0.001); although a number of patient-level factors also were associated with prescription quantity, the effect sizes were much smaller. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a proof of concept that institutional guidelines to reduce postoperative opioid prescribing can improve aftercare in patients undergoing arthroplasty in a short period of time. The current report evaluates our experience with the first 5 months of this program; therefore, longer term data will be mandatory to determine longitudinal guideline adherence and whether the cutoffs established by this pilot initiative require further refinement for individual procedures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, therapeutic study.

Results of a Prospective, Multicenter Initiative Aimed at Developing Opioid-prescribing Guidelines After Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to conduct a prospective, multicenter survey of patients regarding postoperative opioid use to inform development of standardized, evidence-based, procedure-specific opioid prescribing guidelines. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Previous work has shown significant variation in the amount of opioids prescribed after elective procedures, calling for optimization of prescribing. METHODS: Adults (n = 3412) undergoing 25 elective procedures were identified prospectively from 3 academic centers (March 2017 to January 2018) to complete a 29-question telephone interview survey 21 to 35 days post-discharge (n = 688 not contacted, n = 107 refused). Discharge opioids were converted into Morphine Milligram Equivalents (MMEs). RESULTS: Of the 2486 patients who completed the survey, 91.2% received opioids at discharge [median 225 (interquartile range, IQR 125 to 381) MME]. A median of 43 (0 to 184) MMEs were consumed after discharge with 77.3% of patients having leftover opioids at the time of the survey. In total, 61.5% of prescribed opioids were unused; 31.4% of patients used no opioids, and 52.6% required <50 MME. Overall, 90.6% of patients were satisfied with their postdischarge pain control. While 28.3% reported being prescribed too many opioids, 9.0% felt they were not prescribed enough. Only 9.6% of patients disposed of remaining opioids. Of the 2068 opioid-naive respondents (83.2%), 33.6% consumed no opioids (range 5.2% to 80.0% by procedure) and 57.0% (65.7% nonorthopedic) consumed <50 MME. Utilization data and predictors of low/high opioid consumption informed development of postoperative prescribing guidelines. CONCLUSION: A large proportion of postoperative patients reported using no or few opioids following discharge. Guidelines were developed to minimize opioid prescribing and identify patients requiring low doses or additional multimodal pain control.

Attitudes, Beliefs, Practices, and Concerns Among Clinicians Prescribing Opioids in a Large Academic Institution.

Objectives: Opioid treatment of chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) adds complexity and uncertainty to patient interactions. We sought to assess clinician attitudes, beliefs, practice styles, and concerns around opioid prescribing following the release of the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guideline for prescribing opioids for chronic pain. Methods: E-mailed electronic survey to clinicians at a large academic medical institution. Results: A total of 961 clinicians responded to the survey (response rate = 40%), 720 of whom prescribed opioids and were not in training. Sixty-five percent were physicians, and 35% were nurse practitioners or physician assistants, with a mean age of 47 years (SD ± 11.4 years). Eighty-two percent were reluctant to prescribe opioids for CNCP, and only 47% expressed confidence in their care for CNCP patients. Sixty-seven percent were aware of the CDC guideline, 55% were enrolled in the state Prescription Drug Monitoring Program (PDMP), and 2% always or frequently prescribed naloxone to patients on opioids. Guideline awareness was associated with increased confidence in caring for CNCP patients. Clinicians having knowledge of a patient overdose were 31% more likely to be enrolled in the PDMP (relative rate= 1.31, 95% confidence interval = 1.14-1.52, chi-square = 11.00, P <0.01). Clinicians who knew of a patient overdose event were also more likely to express concern about patient opioid dependence and addiction. Conclusions: Opportunities exist to increase awareness of the CDC guideline and to increase clinician confidence in opioid prescribing. Knowledge of an overdose event may influence clinician behavior and concerns about dependence and addiction.

Utilization of Leads After Permanent Implant in Spinal Cord Stimulator Systems.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to determine the frequency and clinical indications associated with implantation of single vs. dual percutaneous lead spinal cord stimulator (SCS) systems and to look further into how these leads are utilized for treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis of all patients undergoing SCS implantation between January 2001 and December 2013 with a minimum of 2 years of clinical follow-up was performed. Number of trial leads and implanted leads was recorded. For patients with dual-lead systems, it was noted if and when the second lead was used, along with the clinical indication for lead activation. RESULTS: In the 259-patient cohort, 15.8% (n = 41) patients underwent placement of a single-lead system, 83.0% (n = 215) underwent placement of a dual-lead system, and 1.2% (n = 3) underwent placement of 3-lead systems. Placement of dual-lead systems was similar among all indication groups. Of those patients with a dual-lead system in place, 88.1% utilized both leads and average time to programming of the second lead was 2.3 months. The most common reason to activate the second lead was inadequate stimulation coverage. Five of the 41 patients with single-lead systems underwent an additional surgery to implant a second lead due to inadequate stimulation with 1 lead. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge this is the first descriptive analysis of the frequency of single- and dual-lead SCS systems. This report indicates that dual-lead systems are most often placed and both leads are required for optimal patient therapy.

Wide Variation and Overprescription of Opioids After Elective Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to identify opioid prescribing practices across surgical specialties and institutions. BACKGROUND: In an effort to minimize the contribution of prescription narcotics to the nationwide opioid epidemic, reductions in postoperative opioid prescribing have been proposed. It has been suggested that a maximum of 7 days, or 200 mg oral morphine equivalents (OME), should be prescribed at discharge in opioid-naïve patients. METHODS: Adults undergoing 25 common elective procedures from 2013 to 2015 were identified from American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data from 3 academic centers in Minnesota, Arizona, and Florida. Opioids prescribed at discharge were abstracted from pharmacy data and converted into OME. Wilcoxon Rank-Sum and Kruskal-Wallis tests assessed variations. RESULTS: Of 7651 patients, 93.9% received opioid prescriptions at discharge. Of 7181 patients who received opioid prescriptions, a median of 375 OME (interquartile range 225-750) were prescribed. Median OME varied by sex (375 men vs 390 women, P = 0.002) and increased with age (375 age 18-39 to 425 age 80+, P < 0.001). Patients with obesity and patients with non-cancer diagnoses received more opioids (both P < 0.001). Subset analysis of the 5756 (75.2%) opioid-naïve patients showed the majority received >200 OME (80.9%). Significant variations in opioid prescribing practices were seen within each procedure and between the 3 medical centers. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients were overprescribed opioids. Significant prescribing variation exists that was not explained by patient factors. These data will guide practices to optimize opioid prescribing after surgery.

Surgical Site Infections in Cancer Patients with Intrathecal Drug Delivery Devices.

Objectives: Our purpose was to determine the incidence of surgical site infection (SSI) in cancer patients receiving an intrathecal drug delivery system (IDDS) and compare that rate with the incidence of SSI in the general population receiving an IDDS or spinal cord stimulator. We attempted to describe risk factors for SSIs in cancer patients treated with IDDS in terms of exposure to cancer treatments. Design: Retrospective review. Setting: Large tertiary care center. Patients: Cancer patients receiving an IDDS in 2006-2013. Methods: The incidence of SSI was determined according to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention definition. Medication regimens and current cancer treatment were investigated to identify immunocompromised patients during IDDS placement. Microbacteriology, treatment, and overall outcomes were investigated. Results: Sixty-four patients had an IDDS implanted in 2006-2013. SSI developed in four patients (6.2%). All four patients had received chemotherapy or radiotherapy within three months before implantation. Three of the three were receiving dexamethasone, and three of the four required explantation of the IDDS. Conclusion: The incidence of SSI was at the upper end of the published infection rates for IDDS. The risk of SSI may be increased in this population because of factors that alter the patient's immune status, including concomitant corticosteroid use, radiotherapy near the SSI, and presence of immunomodulators. The identification and mitigation of certain risk factors for this population may prevent infection in future patients.

Bleeding Complications in Patients Undergoing Intrathecal Drug Delivery System Implantation.

INTRODUCTION: Intrathecal drug delivery systems (IDDSs) have dramatically improved analgesia and the functional status of cancer patients and those with chronic pain states. However, given the close proximity to the neuraxis and frequent concomitant use of antiplatelet or anticoagulant medications, this intervention is not without risk. The goal of this investigation was to determine the incidence of bleeding complications following IDDS placement. METHODS: This is a retrospective review from 2005 through 2014 of adult patients undergoing IDDS implantation or revision at a tertiary care center. The primary outcome was a bleeding-related neurological complication requiring emergency medicine, neurology, or neurosurgical evaluation within 31 days. RESULTS: A total of 247 procedures were performed on 216 unique patients. Patients received aspirin or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) within seven days of needle placement for 64 procedures (25.9%). A preprocedural platelet count or international normalized ratio (INR) was available within 30 days for 138 procedures (55.9%). Of these, two patients had a platelet count lower than 100 x 109/L and one patient had an INR of 1.5 or higher at the time of the procedure. One neurological complication was identified (0.4%) that was not related to procedural bleeding. Similarly, three patients (1.2%) received a periprocedural red blood cell transfusion, none of which were related to procedural bleeding. CONCLUSION: No cases of bleeding-related neurological complications were identified following IDDS placement or revision, including in those receiving aspirin or NSAIDs. Future investigations with larger numbers are needed to further explore the safety of antithrombotic therapy continuation or discontinuation periprocedurally.

Safety of Lumbar Spine Radiofrequency Procedures in Patients Who Have Posterior Spinal Hardware.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether the energy generated by an active radiofrequency (RF) cannula adjacent to lumbar spine hardware could result in heating of the hardware. DESIGN: Prospective study. SETTING: Tertiary care medical center. SUBJECTS: Six patients with lumbar facet joint pain at the level adjacent to lumbar spine fusion hardware were studied. METHODS: A total of 10 lumbar medial branch nerve radiofrequency lesion procedures were performed on six patients. A temperature probe was placed on the fusion hardware to continuously monitor the temperature of the hardware throughout the RF procedure. RESULTS: The temperature of the fusion hardware increased in six of the 10 RF lesion procedures. During two of the procedures, the temperature rose rapidly to 42°C, at which time the procedure was ceased at that level. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that radiofrequency lesioning to treat symptomatic facet joint pain in patients who have adjacent posterior lumbar fusion hardware may result in heat energy being transferred to the adjacent hardware. This may increase the risk of injury to the patient. Monitoring for a temperature increase is easily accomplished by inserting a temperature probe onto the surface of the hardware.

Bleeding Complications in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Spinal Cord Stimulator Trials and Implantations.

INTRODUCTION: Spinal cord stimulators (SCS) are indicated for the management of multiple pain states with strong evidence. Recent guidelines recommend discontinuing aspirin or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for the described procedures. The goal of this investigation is to assess the rate of bleeding and neurologic sequelae in patients undergoing SCS trials and implantation. METHODS: This is a retrospective review from 2005 through 2014 of all patients 18 years or older undergoing the following procedures: Percutaneous SCS implantations, SCS revisions, and SCS trials. Baseline characteristics, antiplatelet and anticoagulation medications, coagulation parameters, and procedural details were extracted. The primary outcome was the presence of a bleeding complication within 31 days of the procedure requiring emergency medicine, neurology, or neurosurgical evaluation. The neurological complication was independently categorized for its potential relationship to procedural bleeding, and periprocedural red blood cell transfusion requirements were analyzed as a secondary outcome. RESULTS: A total of 642 percutaneous SCS procedures were performed on 421 unique patients, including 346 SCS trials, 255 SCS implantations, and 41 revision surgeries. Patients had received aspirin or NSAIDs within 7 days of needle placement for 101 procedures (15.7%). There were no bleeding or neurological complications identified in this cohort. CONCLUSION: Although the incidence of epidural hematoma is low, the development of bleeding complications following SCS lead placement can be devastating. In the present investigation, we identified no cases of epidural hematoma following percutaneous SCS lead placement, including more than 100 patients receiving aspirin or NSAIDs. Future investigations with larger numbers are needed to better define the relationships between periprocedural aspirin and NSAID utilization and bleeding complications.

Patient Outcomes and Spinal Cord Stimulation: A Retrospective Case Series Evaluating Patient Satisfaction, Pain Scores, and Opioid Requirements.

INTRODUCTION: Spinal cord stimulators (SCS) are used to treat various chronic pain states. Establishing patient outcomes in terms of pain control, opioid medication use, and overall satisfaction is vital in maintaining SCS's role in clinical practice. METHODS: All patients who underwent SCS implantation between January 2001 and December 2011 at a tertiary academic pain medicine center were included if he or she underwent permanent cervical or thoracolumbar dorsal column SCS implantation and age was 18 or greater. For the 199 patients who met inclusion criteria, data were collected retrospectively. Preimplant information included indication for implantation, Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) score, and dose in oral morphine equivalents (OME). Postimplant NRS score was recorded at 6 months and 1 year. OME requirement and patient satisfaction were determined at 1 year postimplantation. RESULTS: This data set showed an overall decrease in OME requirements and NRS scores at both 6 months and 1 year. These differences were statistically significant (P < 0.01) compared to preimplantation values. Additionally, 84.27% of patients were satisfied with their implants at 1 year. Patient outcomes were analyzed further in respect to implant indication; groups included failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS), complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS), angina, and other. For all groups, there were statistically significant (P < 0.01) decreases in NRS scores at 6 months and 1 year. In the FBSS and CRPS groups, statistically significant (P < 0.02) decreases in OME usage existed. CONCLUSION: Retrospective review of patients with spinal cord stimulators revealed OME reduction at 1 year for those patients in the FBSS and CRPS groups; patient satisfaction at 1 year and NRS score reduction at 6 months and 1 year were statistically significant for all groups.

Safety of lumbar spine radiofrequency procedures in the presence of posterior pedicle screws: technical report of a cadaver study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the thermal energy associated with lumbar spine radiofrequency neurotomy (RFN) performed near titanium and stainless steel pedicle screws is conducted to the pedicle screws or adjacent tissues, or both, thus introducing potential for thermal damage to those tissues. DESIGN: Cadaver study. SETTING: Cadaver laboratory equipped with fluoroscopy, surgical spine implements, and radiofrequency generator. SUBJECTS: No live human subject; a fresh frozen (and thawed) cadaver torso was used for the study. METHODS: Titanium and stainless steel pedicle screws were placed in the lumbar spine of a fresh frozen cadaver torso with real-time fluoroscopic guidance. Conventional RFN cannula placement was performed at the level of pedicle screws and a control (nonsurgically altered) lumbar level. Neurotomy was performed with conventional radiofrequency lesioning parameters. Temperatures were recorded at multiple sites through thermistor probes. RESULTS: Direct contact of the radiofrequency cannula with the pedicle screws during conventional RFN produced a substantial increase in temperature in the surrounding soft tissues. A small increase in temperature occurred at the same sites at the control level. CONCLUSIONS: Titanium and stainless steel pedicle screws are capable of sustaining large increases in temperature when the radiofrequency probe comes in contact with the screw. These results are suggestive that pedicle screws could serve as a possible source of tissue heating and thermal injury during RFN.

Incidence of clinically significant percutaneous spinal cord stimulator lead migration.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the incidence of percutaneous spinal cord stimulator lead migration, given current hardware and surgical technique. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed records of patients who underwent spinal cord stimulator implantation with percutaneous leads at our institution from 2008 through 2011. We determined the number of patients who required surgical revision for clinically significant lead migration. RESULTS: Clinically significant lead migration requiring surgical revision occurred in three of 143 patients (2.1%) with primary SCS system implants utilizing percutaneous-type leads. CONCLUSIONS: The rate of lead migration observed in our practice was considerably lower than previously published estimates of clinically significant lead migration or revision for lead migration (13%-22%). However, our study did not determine the reason for the decreased rate, which may be influenced by current hardware and implant techniques.

Pharmacists' perspectives on opioid stewardship challenges.

OBJECTIVE: Pharmacists are in a distinctive position to champion opioid stewardship principles in communications with prescribers and patients. This effort is focused on elucidating perceived barriers to uphold these principles observed in pharmacy practice. DESIGN: Qualitative research study. SETTING: A healthcare system, consisting of inpatient and outpatient settings across several United States (US) states in both rural and academic settings. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-six pharmacists who represented the study setting in the sole healthcare system. INTERVENTIONS: Five virtual focus groups were conducted with the 26 pharmacists from inpatient and outpatient settings across four states in both rural and academic settings. Trained moderators conducted 1-hour focus group meetings that consisted of a mix of poll and discussion questions. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Participant questions were related to awareness, knowledge, and system issues affecting opioid stewardship. RESULTS: All pharmacists reported their routine follow-up with prescribers when questions or concerns arise but noted workload as a barrier to meticulous review of opioid prescriptions. Participants highlighted best practices, including transparency on the rationale for guideline exceptions to improve the management of after-hours concerns. Suggestions were integration of guidelines into prescriber and pharmacist order review workflows and a more visible prescriber review of prescription drug monitoring programs. CONCLUSIONS: Improvements in communication and transparency of information related to opioid prescribing between pharmacists and prescribers would enhance opioid stewardship. Integration of opioid guidelines into opioid ordering and review would improve efficiency, guideline adherence, and, most importantly, patient care.

Collaborative improvement on acute opioid prescribing among diverse health systems.

BACKGROUND: Despite broad awareness of the opioid epidemic and the understanding that patients require much fewer opioids than traditionally prescribed, improvement efforts to decrease prescribing have only produced modest advances in recent years. METHODS AND FINDINGS: By using a collaborative model for shared expertise and accountability, nine diverse health care systems completed quality improvement projects together over the course of one year to reduce opioid prescriptions for acute pain. The collaborative approach was flexible to each individual system's goals, and seven of the nine participant institutions definitively achieved their desired results. CONCLUSIONS: This report demonstrates the utility of a collaborative model of improvement to bring about real change in opioid prescribing practices and may inform quality improvement efforts at other institutions.

Trends in Utilization and Cost of Inpatient Spinal Cord Stimulation: Analysis of Data from 2008 to 2014.

OBJECTIVE: In this study, we sought to characterize contemporary trends in cost and utilization of spinal cord stimulation (SCS). METHODS: The Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project-National Inpatient Sample was queried for inpatient admissions from 2008 to 2014 where SCS was performed. We then determined the rates and costs of SCS performed in this time frame to treat diagnoses that we classified as device-related complications, degenerative spine disease, pain syndromes, and neuropathies/neuritis/nerve lesions. Least-squares regression was performed to determine the yearly trends for each indication adjusted by the total number of yearly hospitalizations for that diagnosis. RESULTS: We identified a total of 6876 admissions in whom an SCS was performed. The overall rate of inpatient SCS procedures performed has decreased by 45% from 2008 to 2014 (14.0 to 7.7 procedures per 100,000 admissions). Adjusted analysis for yearly trends also demonstrated a declining trend for all indications; however, this was not found to be statistically significant, except for device-related complications (P = 0.004). The median inflation-adjusted cost of an admission where SCS was performed increased slightly by 7.4% from $26,200 (IQR: $16,700-$33,800) in 2008 to $28,100 (IQR: $19,600-$36,900) in 2014. Billed hospital charges demonstrated a significant increase with median inflation-adjusted admission charge of $66,068 in 2008 to $110,672 in 2014. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a declining contemporary trend in inpatient SCS, an increase was noted in admission costs and hospital charges. A significant declining trend was noted in revision SCS implantations due to device-related complications.

Patient Opioid Requirements Are Often Far Less Than Their Discharge Prescription After Orthopaedic Surgery: the Results of a Prospective Multicenter Survey.

INTRODUCTION: Evidence-based, procedure-specific guidelines for opioid prescribing after orthopaedic surgery are urgently needed to standardize care and minimize excess opioids. METHODS: We developed a prospective, multicenter survey study conducted from March 2017 to January 2018 including 7 common elective orthopaedic surgical procedures (total knee arthroplasty, total hip arthroplasty, lumbar fusion, lumbar laminectomy, rotator cuff repair, arthroscopic meniscectomy, and carpal tunnel release). Phone surveys were conducted between 21 and 35 days postoperatively. We aimed to document both the amount and length of time patients consumed opioid medications to inform further improvements in opioid management and prescribing. RESULTS: Among the 919 orthopaedic patients who completed the survey, 94.3% received opioids at discharge with a median of 388 oral morphine equivalents (OMEs) (interquartile range [IQR] 225 to 675). A median of 128 (IQR 23 to 360) OME were consumed with 77% of patients having leftover opioids. Sixty percent of prescribed opioids were unused; 18.2% of patients used no opioids, and 34.7% required <50 OME. In comparison to departmental guidelines, 50.2% of patients consumed <50% of the recommended prescription maximum per procedure. DISCUSSION: Most patients used far fewer opioids after orthopaedic surgery than prescribed. These data have informed further improvement of our opioid prescription guidelines to more precisely align with anticipated procedure- and patient-specific requirements.

Variations in Postoperative Opioid Prescription Practices and Impact on Refill Prescriptions Following Lumbar Spine Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Understanding postsurgical prescribing patterns and their impact on persistent opioid use is important for establishing reasonable opioid prescribing protocols. We aimed to determine national variation in postoperative opioid prescription practices following elective lumbar spine surgery and their impact on short-term refill prescriptions. METHODS: The OptumLabs Data Warehouse was queried from 2016 to 2017 for adults undergoing anterior lumbar fusion, posterior lumbar fusion, circumferential lumbar fusion, and lumbar decompression/discectomy for degenerative spine disease. Discharge opioid prescription fills were obtained and converted to morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs). Age- and sex-adjusted MMEs and frequency of discharge prescriptions >200 MMEs were determined for each U.S. census division and procedure type. RESULTS: The study included 43,572 patients with 37,894 postdischarge opioid prescription fills. There was wide variation in mean filled MMEs across all census divisions (anterior lumbar fusion: 774-1147 MMEs; posterior lumbar fusion: 717-1280 MMEs; circumferential lumbar fusion: 817-1271 MMEs; lumbar decompression/discectomy: 619-787 MMEs). A significant proportion of cases were found to have filled discharge prescriptions >200 MMEs (posterior lumbar fusion: 78.6%-95%; anterior lumbar fusion: 87.5%-95.6%; circumferential lumbar fusion: 81.4%-96.5%; lumbar decompression/discectomy: 80.5%-91%). Multivariable logistic regression showed that female sex and inpatient surgery were associated with a top-quartile discharge prescription and a short-term second opioid prescription fill, while the opposite was noted for elderly and opioid-naïve patients (all P ≤ 0.05). Prescriptions with long-acting opioids were associated with higher odds of a second opioid prescription fill (reference: nontramadol short-acting opioid). CONCLUSIONS: In analysis of filled opioid prescriptions, we observed a significant proportion of prescriptions >200 MMEs and wide regional variation in postdischarge opioid prescribing patterns following elective lumbar spine surgery.

Impact of Opioid Prescribing Guidelines on Postoperative Opioid Prescriptions Following Elective Spine Surgery: Results From an Institutional Quality Improvement Initiative.

BACKGROUND: With a dramatic rise in prescription opioid use, it is imperative to review postsurgical prescribing patterns given their contributions to the opioid epidemic. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of departmental postoperative prescribing guidelines on opioid prescriptions following elective spine surgery. METHODS: Patients undergoing elective cervical or lumbar spine surgery between 2017 and 2018 were identified. Procedure-specific opioid prescribing guidelines to limit postoperative prescribing following neurosurgical procedures were developed in 2017 and implemented in January 2018. Preguideline data were available from July to December 2017, and postguideline data from July to December 2018. Discharge prescriptions in morphine milliequivalents (MMEs), the proportion of patients (i) discharged with an opioid prescription, (ii) needing refills within 30 d, (iii) with guideline compliant prescriptions were compared in the 2 groups. Multivariable (MV) analyses were performed to assess the impact of guideline implementation on refill prescriptions within 30 d. RESULTS: A total of 1193 patients were identified (cervical: 308; lumbar: 885) with 569 (47.7%) patients from the preguideline period. Following guideline implementation, fewer patients were discharged with a postoperative opioid prescription (92.5% vs 81.7%, P < .001) and median postoperative opioid prescription decreased significantly (300 MMEs vs 225 MMEs, P < .001). The 30-d refill prescription rate was not significantly different between preguideline and postguideline cohorts (pre: 24.4% vs post: 20.2%, P = .079). MV analyses did not demonstrate any impact of guideline implementation on need for 30-d refill prescriptions for both cervical (odds ratio [OR] = 0.68, confidence interval [CI] = 0.37-1.26, P = .22) and lumbar cohorts (OR = 0.95, CI = 0.66-1.36, P = .78). CONCLUSION: Provider-aimed interventions such as implementation of procedure-specific prescribing guidelines can significantly reduce postoperative opioid prescriptions following spine surgery without increasing the need for refill prescriptions for pain control.