Context matters: using an Evidence to Decision (EtD) framework to develop and encourage uptake of opioid deprescribing guideline recommendations at the point-of-care.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the development and use of an Evidence to Decision (EtD) framework when formulating recommendations for the Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guideline for Deprescribing Opioid Analgesics. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Evidence was derived from an overview of systematic reviews and qualitative studies conducted with healthcare professionals and people who take opioids for pain. A multidisciplinary guideline development group conducted extensive EtD framework review and iterative refinement to ensure that guideline recommendations captured contextual factors relevant to the guideline target setting and audience. RESULTS: The guideline development group considered and accounted for the complexities of opioid deprescribing at the individual and health system level, shaping recommendations and practice points to facilitate point-of-care use. Stakeholders exhibited diverse preferences, beliefs, and values. This variability, low certainty of evidence, and system-level policies and funding models impacted the strength of the generated recommendations, resulting in the formulation of four 'conditional' recommendations. CONCLUSION: The context within which evidence-based recommendations are considered, as well as the political and health system environment, can contribute to the success of recommendation implementation. Use of an EtD framework allowed for the development of implementable recommendations relevant at the point-of-care through consideration of limitations of the evidence and relevant contextual factors.

Clinical practice guideline for deprescribing opioid analgesics: summary of recommendations.

INTRODUCTION: Long term opioids are commonly prescribed to manage pain. Dose reduction or discontinuation (deprescribing) can be challenging, even when the potential harms of continuation outweigh the perceived benefits. The Evidence-based clinical practice guideline for deprescribing opioid analgesics was developed using robust guideline development processes and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology, and contains deprescribing recommendations for adults prescribed opioids for pain. MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS: Eleven recommendations provide advice about when, how and for whom opioid deprescribing should be considered, while noting the need to consider each person's goals, values and preferences. The recommendations aim to achieve: implementation of a deprescribing plan at the point of opioid initiation; initiation of opioid deprescribing for persons with chronic non-cancer or chronic cancer-survivor pain if there is a lack of overall and clinically meaningful improvement in function, quality of life or pain, a lack of progress towards meeting agreed therapeutic goals, or the person is experiencing serious or intolerable opioid-related adverse effects; gradual and individualised deprescribing, with regular monitoring and review; consideration of opioid deprescribing for individuals at high risk of opioid-related harms; avoidance of opioid deprescribing for persons nearing the end of life unless clinically indicated; avoidance of opioid deprescribing for persons with a severe opioid use disorder, with the initiation of evidence-based care, such as medication-assisted treatment of opioid use disorder; and use of evidence-based co-interventions to facilitate deprescribing, including interdisciplinary, multidisciplinary or multimodal care. CHANGES IN MANAGEMENT AS A RESULT OF THESE GUIDELINES: To our knowledge, these are the first evidence-based guidelines for opioid deprescribing. The recommendations intend to facilitate safe and effective deprescribing to improve the quality of care for persons taking opioids for pain.

A qualitative trajectory analysis of patients' experiences tapering opioids for chronic pain.

ABSTRACT: Tapering opioids for chronic pain can be challenging for both patients and prescribers, both of whom may be unsure of what to expect in terms of pain, distress, activity interference, and withdrawal symptoms over the first few weeks and months of the taper. To better prepare clinicians to provide patient-centred tapering support, the current research used prospective longitudinal qualitative methods to capture individual-level variation in patients' experience over the first few months of a voluntary physician-guided taper. The research aimed to identify patterns in individuals' experience of tapering and explore whether patient characteristics, readiness to taper, opioid tapering self-efficacy, or psychosocial context were related to tapering trajectory. Twenty-one patients with chronic noncancer pain commencing tapering of long-term opioid therapy were recruited from a metropolitan tertiary pain clinic (n = 13) and a regional primary care practice (n = 8). Semistructured phone interviews were conducted a mean of 8 times per participant over a mean duration of 12 weeks (N = 173). Four opioid-tapering trajectories were identified, which we characterised as thriving, resilient, surviving, and distressed. High and low readiness to taper was a defining characteristic of thriving and distressed trajectories, respectively. Life adversity was a prominent theme of resilient and distressed trajectories, with supportive relationships buffering the effects of adversity for those who followed a resilient trajectory. Discussion focuses on the implications of these findings for the preparation and support of patients with chronic pain who are commencing opioid tapering.

General practitioner attitudes towards systems-level opioid prescribing interventions: A pooled secondary qualitative analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Several Australian systems-level initiatives have been implemented to reduce opioid overprescribing. The aim of this study was to explore general practitioner (GP) attitudes towards these interventions. METHOD: This secondary qualitative analysis used pooled interview data (collected in 2018 and 2019), recoded using thematic analysis and the Capability-Opportunity-Motivation model of behaviour change (COM-B model). Participants were professionally registered GPs or general practice registrars from Victoria and New South Wales. RESULTS: Fifty-seven GPs and general practice registrars were included. Participants expressed positive attitudes towards real-time prescription monitoring and codeine up-scheduling. High-prescriber 'nudge' letters sent by the government were perceived to be overly paternalistic and as potentially threatening to the prescribing of adequate analgesia. Guidelines and education were considered useful in principle, but were not commonly used. DISCUSSION: Systems-level interventions aimed at reducing opioid overprescribing by GPs may be more successful if they partner with GPs and consider prescriber motivation a prerequisite to capacity to change. It may be beneficial for new interventions to target motivation beyond single mechanisms.

Patterns of oxycodone controlled release use in older people with cancer following public subsidy of oxycodone/naloxone formulations: An Australian population-based study.

AIM: Public subsidy of the oxycodone/naloxone controlled release (CR) combination in December 2011 expanded the overall market for oxycodone CR in the general public in Australia; we evaluate its impact in people with cancer. METHODS: We used Repatriation Pharmaceutical Benefits dispensing data linked with the NSW Cancer Registry for Department of Veterans' Affairs (DVA) healthcare card holders 65 years and older residing in NSW between 2004 and 2013 to identify clients with cancer and their opioid dispensings. We used interrupted time series analysis to model changes in monthly rates of oxycodone CR tablets dispensed and initiations. We performed a retrospective cohort study to examine changes in client characteristics and opioid utilization over time by comparing clients initiating oxycodone CR before and after subsidy. RESULTS: The rate of oxycodone CR tablets dispensed/month increased by 20% from December 2011, due to uptake of the oxycodone/naloxone CR combination; monthly initiations increased immediately by 17%. Initiations of buprenorphine, fentanyl, and morphine declined from December 2011. DVA healthcare card holders were significantly more likely to initiate the 5 mg oxycodone CR formulation; more likely to use immediate release oxycodone in the 90 days following initiation; and less likely to use a weak opioid in the 90 days preceding oxycodone CR initiation following December 2011 than they were prior to that time. CONCLUSIONS: The public subsidy of the oxycodone/naloxone CR formulation expanded the overall oxycodone CR market for DVA healthcare card holders with cancer. Our findings highlight the need for updated guidelines around risk management for opioid treatment in patients with cancer.

Beyond the black stump: rapid reviews of health research issues affecting regional, rural and remote Australia.

CHAPTER 1: RETAIL INITIATIVES TO IMPROVE THE HEALTHINESS OF FOOD ENVIRONMENTS IN RURAL, REGIONAL AND REMOTE COMMUNITIES: Objective: To synthesise the evidence for effectiveness of initiatives aimed at improving food retail environments and consumer dietary behaviour in rural, regional and remote populations in Australia and comparable countries, and to discuss the implications for future food environment initiatives for rural, regional and remote areas of Australia. STUDY DESIGN: Rapid review of articles published between January 2000 and May 2020. DATA SOURCES: We searched MEDLINE (EBSCOhost), Health and Society Database (Informit) and Rural and Remote Health Database (Informit), and included studies undertaken in rural food environment settings in Australia and other countries. DATA SYNTHESIS: Twenty-one articles met the inclusion criteria, including five conducted in Australia. Four of the Australian studies were conducted in very remote populations and in grocery stores, and one was conducted in regional Australia. All of the overseas studies were conducted in rural North America. All of them revealed a positive influence on food environment or consumer behaviour, and all were conducted in disadvantaged, rural communities. Positive outcomes were consistently revealed by studies of initiatives that focused on promotion and awareness of healthy foods and included co-design to generate community ownership and branding. CONCLUSION: Initiatives aimed at improving rural food retail environments were effective and, when implemented in different rural settings, may encourage improvements in population diets. The paucity of studies over the past 20 years in Australia shows a need for more research into effective food retail environment initiatives, modelled on examples from overseas, with studies needed across all levels of remoteness in Australia. Several retail initiatives that were undertaken in rural North America could be replicated in rural Australia and could underpin future research. CHAPTER 2: WHICH INTERVENTIONS BEST SUPPORT THE HEALTH AND WELLBEING NEEDS OF RURAL POPULATIONS EXPERIENCING NATURAL DISASTERS?: Objective: To explore and evaluate health and social care interventions delivered to rural and remote communities experiencing natural disasters in Australia and other high income countries. STUDY DESIGN: We used systematic rapid review methods. First we identified a test set of citations and generated a frequency table of Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) to index articles. Then we used combinations of MeSH terms and keywords to search the MEDLINE (Ovid) database, and screened the titles and abstracts of the retrieved references. DATA SOURCES: We identified 1438 articles via database searches, and a further 62 articles via hand searching of key journals and reference lists. We also found four relevant grey literature resources. After removing duplicates and undertaking two stages of screening, we included 28 studies in a synthesis of qualitative evidence. DATA SYNTHESIS: Four of us read and assessed the full text articles. We then conducted a thematic analysis using the three phases of the natural disaster response cycle. CONCLUSION: There is a lack of robust evaluation of programs and interventions supporting the health and wellbeing of people in rural communities affected by natural disasters. To address the cumulative and long term impacts, evidence suggests that continuous support of people's health and wellbeing is needed. By using a lens of rural adversity, the complexity of the lived experience of natural disasters by rural residents can be better understood and can inform development of new models of community-based and integrated care services. CHAPTER 3: THE IMPACT OF BUSHFIRE ON THE WELLBEING OF CHILDREN LIVING IN RURAL AND REMOTE AUSTRALIA: Objective: To investigate the impact of bushfire events on the wellbeing of children living in rural and remote Australia. STUDY DESIGN: Literature review completed using rapid realist review methods, and taking into consideration the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement for systematic reviews. DATA SOURCES: We sourced data from six databases: EBSCOhost (Education), EBSCOhost (Health), EBSCOhost (Psychology), Informit, MEDLINE and PsycINFO. We developed search terms to identify articles that could address the research question based on the inclusion criteria of peer reviewed full text journal articles published in English between 1983 and 2020. We initially identified 60 studies and, following closer review, extracted data from eight studies that met the inclusion criteria. DATA SYNTHESIS: Children exposed to bushfires may be at increased risk of poorer wellbeing outcomes. Findings suggest that the impact of bushfire exposure may not be apparent in the short term but may become more pronounced later in life. Children particularly at risk are those from more vulnerable backgrounds who may have compounding factors that limit their ability to overcome bushfire trauma. CONCLUSION: We identified the short, medium and long term impacts of bushfire exposure on the wellbeing of children in Australia. We did not identify any evidence-based interventions for supporting outcomes for this population. Given the likely increase in bushfire events in Australia, research into effective interventions should be a priority. CHAPTER 4: THE ROLE OF NATIONAL POLICIES TO ADDRESS RURAL ALLIED HEALTH, NURSING AND DENTISTRY WORKFORCE MALDISTRIBUTION: Objective: Maldistribution of the health workforce between rural, remote and metropolitan communities contributes to longstanding health inequalities. Many developed countries have implemented policies to encourage health care professionals to work in rural and remote communities. This scoping review is an international synthesis of those policies, examining their effectiveness at recruiting and retaining nursing, dental and allied health professionals in rural communities. STUDY DESIGN: Using scoping review methods, we included primary research - published between 1 September 2009 and 30 June 2020 - that reported an evaluation of existing policy initiatives to address workforce maldistribution in high income countries with a land mass greater than 100 000 km2 . DATA SOURCES: We searched MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Ovid Emcare, Informit, Scopus, and Web of Science. We screened 5169 articles for inclusion by title and abstract, of which we included 297 for full text screening. We then extracted data on 51 studies that had been conducted in Australia, the United States, Canada, United Kingdom and Norway. DATA SYNTHESIS: We grouped the studies based on World Health Organization recommendations on recruitment and retention of health care workers: education strategies (n = 27), regulatory change (n = 11), financial incentives (n = 6), personal and professional support (n = 4), and approaches with multiple components (n = 3). CONCLUSION: Considerable work has occurred to address workforce maldistribution at a local level, underpinned by good practice guidelines, but rarely at scale or with explicit links to coherent overarching policy. To achieve policy aspirations, multiple synergistic evidence-based initiatives are needed, and implementation must be accompanied by well designed longitudinal evaluations that assess the effectiveness of policy objectives. CHAPTER 5: AVAILABILITY AND CHARACTERISTICS OF PUBLICLY AVAILABLE HEALTH WORKFORCE DATA SOURCES IN AUSTRALIA: Objective: Many data sources are used in Australia to inform health workforce planning, but their characteristics in terms of relevance, accessibility and accuracy are uncertain. We aimed to identify and appraise publicly available data sources used to describe the Australian health workforce. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a scoping review in which we searched bibliographic databases, websites and grey literature. Two reviewers independently undertook title and abstract screening and full text screening using Covidence software. We then assessed the relevance, accessibility and accuracy of data sources using a customised appraisal tool. DATA SOURCES: We searched for potential workforce data sources in nine databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Ovid Emcare, Scopus, Web of Science, Informit, the JBI Evidence-based Practice Database, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Library) and the grey literature, and examined several pre-defined websites. DATA SYNTHESIS: During the screening process we identified 6955 abstracts and examined 48 websites, from which we identified 12 publicly available data sources - eight primary and four secondary data sources. The primary data sources were generally of modest quality, with low scores in terms of reference period, accessibility and missing data. No single primary data source scored well across all domains of the appraisal tool. CONCLUSION: We identified several limitations of data sources used to describe the Australian health workforce. Establishment of a high quality, longitudinal, linked database that can inform all aspects of health workforce development is urgently needed, particularly for rural health workforce and services planning. CHAPTER 6: RAPID REALIST REVIEW OF OPIOID TAPERING IN THE CONTEXT OF LONG TERM OPIOID USE FOR NON-CANCER PAIN IN RURAL AREAS: Objective: To describe interventions, barriers and enablers associated with opioid tapering for patients with chronic non-cancer pain in rural primary care settings. STUDY DESIGN: Rapid realist review registered on the international register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) and conducted in accordance with RAMESES standards. DATA SOURCES: English language, peer-reviewed articles reporting qualitative, quantitative and mixed method studies, published between January 2016 and July 2020, and accessed via MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL Complete, PsycINFO, Informit or the Cochrane Library during June and July 2020. Grey literature relating to prescribing,deprescribing or tapering of opioids in chronic non-cancer pain, published between January 2016 and July 2020, was identified by searching national and international government, health service and peek organisation websites using Google Scholar. DATA SYNTHESIS: Our analysis of reported approaches to tapering conducted across rural and non-rural contexts showed that tapering opioids is complex and challenging, and identified several barriers and enablers. Successful outcomes in rural areas appear likely through therapeutic relationships, coordination and support, by using modalities and models of care that are appropriate in rural settings and by paying attention to harm minimisation. CONCLUSION: Rural primary care providers do not have access to resources available in metropolitan centres for dealing with patients who have chronic non-cancer pain and are taking opioid medications. They often operate alone or in small group practices, without peer support and access to multidisciplinary and specialist teams. Opioid tapering approaches described in the literature include regulation, multimodal and multidisciplinary approaches, primary care provider support, guidelines, and patient-centred strategies. There is little research to inform tapering in rural contexts. Our review provides a synthesis of the current evidence in the form of a conceptual model. This preliminary model could inform the development of a model of care for use in implementation research, which could test a variety of mechanisms for supporting decision making, reducing primary care providers' concerns about potential harms arising from opioid tapering, and improving patient outcomes.

Risk of opioid misuse in people with cancer and pain and related clinical considerations: a qualitative study of the perspectives of Australian general practitioners.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the perspectives of general practitioners (GPs) concerning the risk of opioid misuse in people with cancer and pain and related clinical considerations. DESIGN: A qualitative approach using semistructured telephone interviews. Analysis used an integrative approach. SETTING: Primary care. PARTICIPANTS: Australian GPs with experience of prescribing opioids for people with cancer and pain. RESULTS: Twenty-two GPs participated, and three themes emerged. Theme 1 (Misuse is not the main problem) contextualised misuse as a relatively minor concern compared with pain control and toxicity, and highlighted underlying systemic factors, including limitations in continuity of care and doctor expertise. Theme 2 ('A different mindset' for cancer pain) captured participants' relative comfort in prescribing opioids for pain in cancer versus non-cancer contexts, and acknowledgement that compassion and greater perceived community acceptance were driving factors, in addition to scientific support for mechanisms and clinical efficacy. Participant attitudes towards prescribing for people with cancer versus non-cancer pain differed most when cancer was in the palliative phase, when they were unconcerned by misuse. Participants were equivocal about the risk-benefit ratio of long-term opioid therapy in the chronic phase of cancer, and were reluctant to prescribe for disease-free survivors. Theme 3 ('The question is always, 'how lazy have you been?') captured participants' acknowledgement that they sometimes prescribed opioids for cancer pain as a default, easier option compared with more holistic pain management. CONCLUSIONS: Findings highlight the role of specific clinical considerations in distinguishing risk of opioid misuse in the cancer versus non-cancer population, rather than diagnosis per se. Further efforts are needed to ensure continuity of care where opioid prescribing is shared. Greater evidence is needed to guide opioid prescribing in disease-free survivors and the chronic phase of cancer, especially in the context of new treatments for metastatic disease.

Chronic pain: Overlap and specificity in multimorbidity management.

BACKGROUND: Chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) frequently co-occurs with other chronic conditions, resulting in multimorbidity. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this article is to summarise current approaches to CNCP management and explore areas of specificity and overlap with chronic conditions in general. DISCUSSION: The biomedical component of the management of chronic conditions may be condition-specific. However, mind-body, connection, activity and nutrition components entail significant overlap and are helpful across conditions. Effective practice avoids overemphasis on medical treatments at the expense of evidence-based, multidimensional lifestyle approaches. CNCP management illustrates the case for reconceptualising chronic condition management using a generic lifestyle-based approach. This capitalises on overlapping treatments, creates system efficiency and allows patients with multimorbidity to be treated more effectively in primary care, with only a small subgroup referred to condition-specific tertiary services.

Changes in Australian Early-Career General Practitioners' Benzodiazepine Prescribing: a Longitudinal Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Australian and international guidelines recommend benzodiazepines and related drugs (hereafter "benzodiazepines") as second-line, short-term medications only. Most benzodiazepines are prescribed by general practitioners (GPs; family physicians). Australian GP registrars ("trainees" or "residents" participating in a post-hospital training, apprenticeship-like, practice-based vocational training program), like senior GPs, prescribe benzodiazepines at high rates. Education within a training program, and experience in general practice, would be expected to reduce benzodiazepine prescribing. OBJECTIVE: To establish if registrars' prescribing of benzodiazepines decreases with time within a GP training program DESIGN: Longitudinal analysis from the Registrar Clinical Encounters in Training multi-site cohort study PARTICIPANTS: Registrars of five of Australia's 17 Regional Training Providers. Analyses were restricted to patients ≥ 16 years. MAIN MEASURES: The main outcome factor was prescription of a benzodiazepine. Conditional logistic regression was used, with registrar included as a fixed effect, to assess within-registrar changes in benzodiazepine-prescribing rates. The "time" predictor variable was "training term" (6-month duration Terms 1-4). To contextualize these "within-registrar" changes, a mixed effects logistic regression model was used, including a random effect for registrar, to assess within-program changes in benzodiazepine-prescribing rates over time. The "time" predictor variable was "year" (2010-2015). KEY RESULTS: Over 12 terms of data collection, 2010-2015, 1161 registrars (response rate 96%) provided data on 136,809 face-to-face office-based consultations. Two thousand six hundred thirty-two benzodiazepines were prescribed (for 1.2% of all problems managed). In the multivariable model, there was a significant reduction in within-program benzodiazepine prescribing over time (year) (p = < 0.001, OR = 0.94, CI = 0.90, 0.97). However, there was no significant change in 'within-registrar' prescribing over time (registrar Term) (p = 0.92, OR = 1.00 [95% CI = 0.94-1.06]). CONCLUSIONS: Despite a welcome temporal trend for reductions in overall benzodiazepine prescribing from 2010 to 2015, there is still room for improvement and our findings suggest a lack of effect of specific GP vocational training program education and, thus, an opportunity for targeted education.

Protecting Pain Patients. The Evaluation of a Chronic Pain Educational Intervention.

INTRODUCTION: Advocacy and commercially funded education successfully reduced barriers to the provision of long-term opioid analgesia. The subsequent escalation of opioid prescribing for chronic noncancer pain has seen increasing harms without improved pain outcomes. METHODS: This was a one-group pretest-posttest design study. A multidisciplinary team developed a chronic pain educational package for general practitioner trainees emphasizing limitations, risk-mitigation, and deprescribing of opioids with transition to active self-care. This educational intervention incorporated prereadings, a resource kit, and a 90-minute interactional video case-based workshop incorporated into an education day. Evaluation was via pre- and postintervention (two months) questionnaires. Differences in management of two clinical vignettes were tested using McNemar's test. RESULTS: Of 58 eligible trainees, 47 (response rate = 81.0%) completed both questionnaires (36 of whom attended the workshop). In a primary analysis including these 47 trainees, therapeutic intentions of tapering opioid maintenance for pain (in a paper-based clinical vignette) increased from 37 (80.4%) pre-intervention to 44 (95.7%) postintervention (P = 0.039). In a sensitivity analysis including only trainees attending the workshop, 80.0% pre-intervention and 97.1% postintervention tapered opioids (P = 0.070). Anticipated initiation of any opioids for a chronic osteoarthritic knee pain clinical vignette reduced from 35 (74.5%) to 24 (51.1%; P = 0.012) in the primary analysis and from 80.0% to 41.7% in the sensitivity analysis (P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Necessary improvements in pain management and opioid harm avoidance are predicated on primary care education being of demonstrable efficacy. This brief educational intervention improved hypothetical management approaches two months subsequently. Further research measuring objective changes in physician behavior, especially opioid prescribing, is indicated.

Does brief chronic pain management education change opioid prescribing rates? A pragmatic trial in Australian early-career general practitioners.

We aimed to evaluate the effect of pain education on opioid prescribing by early-career general practitioners. A brief training workshop was delivered to general practice registrars of a single regional training provider. The workshop significantly reduced "hypothetical" opioid prescribing (in response to paper-based vignettes) in an earlier evaluation. The effect of the training on "actual" prescribing was evaluated using a nonequivalent control group design nested within the Registrar Clinical Encounters in Training (ReCEnT) cohort study: 4 other regional training providers were controls. In ReCEnT, registrars record detailed data (including prescribing) during 60 consecutive consultations, on 3 occasions. Analysis was at the level of individual problem managed, with the primary outcome factor being prescription of an opioid analgesic and the secondary outcome being opioid initiation. Between 2010 and 2015, 168,528 problems were recorded by 849 registrars. Of these, 71% were recorded by registrars in the nontraining group. Eighty-two percentages were before training. Opioid analgesics were prescribed in 4382 (2.5%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.40-2.63) problems, with 1665 of these (0.97%, 95% CI: 0.91-1.04) representing a new prescription. There was no relationship between the training and total prescribing after training (interaction odds ratio: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.75-1.35; P value 0.96). There was some evidence of a reduction in initial opioid prescriptions in the training group (interaction odds ratio: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.48-1.16; P value 0.19). This brief training package failed to increase overall opioid cessation. The inconsistency of these actual prescribing results with "hypothetical" prescribing behavior suggests that reducing opioid prescribing in chronic noncancer pain requires more than changing knowledge and attitudes.

The pattern of anxiolytic and hypnotic management by Australian general practice trainees.

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: Guidelines recommend anxiolytics and hypnotics (A/H) as second-line, short-term medications. We aimed to establish prevalence and associations of A/H prescribing by Australian general practice (GP) trainees. DESIGN AND METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis from a cohort study of vocational trainees from four GP Regional Training Providers during 2010-2013. General practice trainees act as independent practitioners (including for prescribing purposes) while having recourse to advice from a GP supervisor. Practice and trainee demographic data were collected as well as patient, clinical and educational data from 60 consecutive consultations of each trainee each training term. Analysis was at the level of individual problem managed, with the outcome factor being prescription of any anxiolytic or hypnotic. RESULTS: Overall, 645 registrars (response rate 94.0%) prescribed 68 582 medications in 69 621 consultations (with 112 890 problems managed). A/Hs were prescribed for 1.3% of problems managed and comprised 2.2% of all prescriptions. They were prescribed particularly for insomnia (28.2%) or anxiety (21.8%), but also for many 'off-label' indications. Significant associations of A/H prescriptions were: patient-level (greater age, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander status, English-speaking background, being new to the trainee but not to the practice); trainee-level (male) and consultation-level (longer duration, pre-existing problem, specialist referral not being made). Prescribing was significantly lower in one of the four Regional Training Providers. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: GP trainees, inconsistent with most guideline recommendations, prescribe A/Hs mainly as maintenance therapy to unfamiliar and older patients. Our results suggest that changes in management approaches are needed which may be facilitated by support for psychotherapeutic training. [Holliday SM, Morgan S, Tapley A, Henderson KM, Dunlop AJ, van Driel ML, Spike NA, McArthur LA, Ball J, Oldmeadow CJ, Magin PJ. The pattern of anxiolytic and hypnotic management by Australian general practice trainees. Drug Alcohol Rev 2017;36:261-269].

The Pattern of Opioid Management by Australian General Practice Trainees.

OBJECTIVE: With escalating opioid prescribing come individual and public health harms. To inform quality improvement measures, understanding of opioid prescribing is essential. We aimed to establish consultation-level prevalence and associations of opioid prescribing. DESIGN: A cross-sectional secondary analysis from a longitudinal multisite cohort study of general practitioner (GP) vocational trainees: "Registrar Clinical Encounters in Training." SETTING: Four of Australia's seventeen GP Regional Training Providers, during 2010-13. SUBJECTS: GP trainees. METHODS: Practice and trainee demographic data were collected as well as patient, clinical and educational data of 60 consecutive consultations of each trainee, each training term. Outcome factors were any opioid analgesic prescription and initial opioid analgesic prescription for a specific problem for the first time. RESULTS: Overall, 645 trainees participated. Opioids comprised 4.3% prescriptions provided for 3.8% of patients. Most frequently prescribed were codeine (39.9%) and oxycodone (33.4%). Prescribing was for acute pain (29.3%), palliative care (2.6%) or other indications (68.1%). Most prescribing involved repeat prescriptions for pre-existing problems (62.7% of total). Other associations included older patients; prescriber and patient male gender; Aboriginal/Torres Strait Islander status; rural and disadvantaged locations; longer consultations; and generation of referrals, follow-up, and imaging requests. Opioid initiation was more likely for new patients with new problems, but otherwise associations were similar. Trainees rarely reported addiction risk-mitigation strategies. CONCLUSIONS: Most opioids were prescribed as maintenance therapy for non-cancer pain. Demographic associations with opioid analgesic prescribing resemble those presenting for opioid dependency treatment. Our findings should inform measures by regulators and medical educators supporting multimodal pain management.

An examination of the influences on New South Wales general practitioners regarding the provision of opioid substitution therapy.

INTRODUCTION: Few general practitioners (GP) prescribe opioid substitution therapy. Our aim was to analyse their previously identified motivating factors by describing their frequency and demographic associations. METHODS: An anonymous, cross-sectional questionnaire-based survey on opioid prescribing in pain and dependency was distributed across five New South Wales Divisions of GPs. Questions elicited opinions on 11 barriers and five facilitators previously described in qualitative literature. Data were analysed against demographic variables, including opioid substitution therapy prescriber (OSTP) status and postgraduate training status. 'Profiles' of non-OSTPs were then constructed using latent class analysis. RESULTS: Of the 1735 surveys posted, there were 404 responses (23.3%), with 16% respondents being OSTPs. Frequently reported barriers included: 'negative experiences with the opioid dependent' (72%), 'heavy workload' (60%) and 'lack of specialist support' (58%), with most barriers less frequent among OSTPs. Facilitating factors included: 'more accessible specialist support' (75%), 'more accessible training' (67%) and 'better evidence of safety and efficacy' (64%), with the latter two significantly less frequently among OSTPs. Latent class analysis of the non-OSTPs revealed three distinct clusters. The smallest ('class 3') had the least barriers and resembled OSTPs demographically. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: The pattern of motivating factors towards the psychological, social and behavioural challenges of the management of dependency has a predominantly negative bias. However, this lessens with postgraduate training and OSTP experience. Structural and logistical options are identified to promote OSTP recruitment and retention. GPs resembling class 3 may be more amenable to becoming OSTPs and may be worth targeting for recruitment.

Opioid use in chronic non-cancer pain--part 1: known knowns and known unknowns.

BACKGROUND: Opioids have a critical, time-limited role in our management of acute and terminal pain and an open-ended role in our management of opioid dependency. They also have a use in the management of chronic non-cancer pain. OBJECTIVE: To provide an understanding of what is known, and what is not known, about the use of opioids in chronic non-cancer pain using an evidence-based approach. DISCUSSION: For chronic non-cancer pain, the evidence base for the long-term use of opiates is mediocre, with weak support for minimal improvements in pain measures and little or no evidence for functional restoration. Much research and professional education in this field has been underwritten by commercial interests. Escalating the prescribing of opioids has been repeatedly linked to a myriad of individual and public harms, including overdose deaths. Many patients on long-term opioids may never be able to taper off them, despite their associated toxicities and lack of efficacy. Prescribers need familiarity with good opioid care practices for evidence-based indications. Outside these areas, in chronic non-cancer pain, the general practitioner needs to use time and diligence to implement risk mitigation strategies. However, if a GP believes chronic non-cancer pain management requires opioids, prescribing must be both selective and cautious to allow patients to maintain, or regain, control of their pain management.

Opioid use in chronic non-cancer pain--part 2: prescribing issues and alternatives.

BACKGROUND: Managing pain requires time and effort to attend to its biopsychosocial characteristics. This requires proper planning and a whole-of-practice approach. OBJECTIVE: This article describes how to prepare your practice for quality chronic pain care, and details a non-judgemental and effective management approach, including the minimisation of opioid harms. DISCUSSION: It is helpful to have a consistent, whole-of-practice approach when a patient new to the practice presents with a compelling case for opioids. Assessing patients with chronic pain includes a full medical history and detailed examination according to a biopsychosocial approach and applying 'universal precautions' to make a misuse risk assessment. A management plan should consider a range of non-opioid modalities, with a focus on active rather than passive strategies. Integrated multidisciplinary pain services have been shown to improve pain and function outcomes for patients with complex chronic pain issues, but access is often limited. Time-limited opioid use is recommended with initial and regular monitoring, including pain and function scores, urine toxicology, compliance with regulatory surveillance systems and assessment for adverse reactions and drug related aberrant behaviours. When ceasing prescribing, opioids should be weaned slowly, except in response to violence or criminal activity.