Engaging Patient Advisory Boards of African American Community Members with Type 2 Diabetes in Implementing and Refining a Peer-Led Medication Adherence Intervention.

African Americans are more likely than non-Hispanic whites to be diagnosed with and die from diabetes. A contributing factor to these health disparities is African Americans' poor diabetes medication adherence that is due in part to sociocultural barriers (e.g., medicine and illness misperceptions), which negatively affect diabetes management. In our prior work, we engaged with community stakeholders to develop and test a brief version of a culturally adapted intervention to address these barriers to medication adherence. The objective of this study was to elicit feedback to inform the refinement of the full 8-week intervention. We utilized a community-engaged study design to conduct a series of meetings with two cohorts of patient advisory boards of African Americans with type 2 diabetes who were adherent to their diabetes medicines (i.e., peer ambassadors). In total, 15 peer ambassadors were paired with 21 African American participants (i.e., peer buddies) to provide specific intervention support as peers and serve in an advisory role as a board member. Data were collected during nine board meetings with the patient stakeholders. A qualitative thematic analysis of the data was conducted to synthesize the findings. Feedback from the patient advisory board contributed to refining the intervention in the immediate-term, short-term, and long-term. The inclusion of African American community members living with type 2 diabetes on the advisory board contributed to further tailoring the intervention to the specific needs of African Americans with type 2 diabetes in the community.

Pain and Policy Studies Group: Two Decades of Working to Address Regulatory Barriers to Improve Opioid Availability and Accessibility Around the World.

For two decades, the Pain & Policy Studies Group (PPSG), a global research program at the University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, has worked passionately to fulfill its mission of improving pain relief by achieving balanced access to opioids worldwide. PPSG's early work highlighted the conceptual framework of balance leading to the development of the seminal guidelines and criteria for evaluating opioid policy. It has collaborated at the global level with United Nations agencies to promote access to opioids and has developed a unique model of technical assistance to help national governments assess regulatory barriers to essential medicines for pain relief and amend existing or develop new legislation that facilitates appropriate and adequate opioid prescribing according to international standards. This model was initially applied in regional workshops and individual country projects and then adapted for PPSG's International Pain Policy Fellowship, which provides long-term mentoring and support for several countries simultaneously. The PPSG disseminates its work online in several ways, including an extensive Web site, news alerts, and through several social media outlets. PPSG has become the focal point for expertise on policy governing drug control and medicine and pharmacy practice related to opioid availability and pain relief.

The Contribution of the International Pain Policy Fellowship in Improving Opioid Availability in Georgia.

In the Republic of Georgia, the incidence and prevalence of cancer are increasing, signifying a growing need for palliative care and pain relief, including with controlled opioid medicines. As a signatory to the Single Convention, the Georgian government has a responsibility to ensure the adequate availability of controlled medicines for medical purposes; however, the consumption of morphine is very low, suggesting a high occurrence of unrelieved pain. In Georgia, palliative care development began in the 2000s including the adoption of a policy document in 2005, the creation of the National Palliative Care Coordinator in 2006, and important changes in Georgian legislation in 2007 and 2008, which served to lay a foundation for improving opioid availability. In 2008, a neurologist from the Sarajishvili Institute of Neurology and Neurosurgery in Tbilisi, and member of the Georgia National Association for Palliative Care, was selected to be an International Pain Policy Fellow to focus on improving opioid availability. Working with colleagues, government officials, and international experts, the Fellow contributed to several improvements to opioid availability, such as 1) positive changes to opioid prescribing legislation, 2) clarification of legislative terminology regarding dependence syndrome, 3) initiating the importation of both sustained-release and immediate-release oral morphine, and 4) improvements in the availability of sustained-release morphine. Despite these varied achievements, morphine consumption remains low in Georgia relative to the estimated amounts needed. The Fellow is continuing to study and understand the barriers that are impeding physician's prescription of opioids and patient's acceptance of them.

A Multifaceted Approach to Improve the Availability and Accessibility of Opioids for the Treatment of Cancer Pain in Serbia: Results From the International Pain Policy Fellowship (2006-2012) and Recommendations for Action.

Cancer is the second leading cause of death in Serbia, and at least 14,000-16,000 patients experience moderate-to-severe cancer pain every year. Cancer pain relief has been impeded by inadequate availability of opioid analgesics and barriers to their accessibility. In 2006, a Serbian oncologist was selected as an International Pain Policy Fellow. The fellow identified barriers to opioid availability in Serbia and implemented an action plan to address the unavailability of oral morphine, attitudinal and knowledge barriers about opioids, and barriers in the national opioid control policy, in collaboration with the government, local partners, and international experts, including those from the World Health Organization. Collaborative efforts resulted in availability of immediate-release oral morphine, registration of controlled-release hydromorphone, and reimbursement of oral methadone for cancer pain; numerous educational activities aimed at changing inadequate knowledge and negative attitudes toward opioids; recognition of opioids as essential medicines for palliative care in a new National Palliative Care Strategy; and recognition of the medical use of opioids as psychoactive-controlled substances for the relief of pain included in a new national law on psychoactive-controlled substances, and the development of recommendations for updating regulations on prescribing and dispensing opioids. An increase in opioid consumption at the institutional and national levels also was observed. This article outlines a multifaceted approach to improving access to strong opioids for cancer pain management and palliative care in a middle-income country and offers a potential road map to success.

Toward safe accessibility of opioid pain medicines in Vietnam and other developing countries: a balanced policy method.

Moderate or severe pain is common among people with advanced cancer and other life-threatening illnesses. Yet despite agreement that pain relief is a human right, the poorest 80% of the world's population rarely have access to strong opioid analgesics. Excessively restrictive opioid policies, especially in developing countries, both stem from and propagate misguided fears about opioids, so-called opiophobia. Because opiophobia, like any norm, is historically, socially, and culturally situated, efforts to change opiophobic policies will be most effective if guided by awareness of their historical, social, and cultural determinants. We describe some of these determinants in Vietnam and report on results of an ongoing project there to allay opiophobia and improve safe access to opioids for medical uses. We used a method that entails working with committed local partners, including a high-level official from the Ministry of Health, to review all Vietnamese policies governing opioid accessibility to identify the barriers; devising an action plan to safely reduce or circumnavigate the barriers; obtaining buy-in for the plan from all stakeholders, including drug regulators and the police; and assisting the Ministry of Health to implement the plan. Since the start of the project, morphine consumption has increased each year and as of 2010 was ninefold greater than in 2003, and the number of hospitals offering palliative care has increased from three to 15. We conclude that this balanced policy method appears to be helping to reduce barriers to opioid access in Vietnam and should be used in other developing countries.

Opioid availability and palliative care in Nepal: influence of an international pain policy fellowship.

Globally, cancer incidence and mortality are increasing, and most of the burden is shifting to low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where patients often present with late-stage disease and severe pain. Unfortunately, LMICs also face a disproportionate lack of access to pain-relieving medicines such as morphine, despite the medical and scientific literature that shows morphine to be effective to treat moderate and severe cancer pain. In 2008, an oncologist from Nepal, one of the poorest countries in the world, was selected to participate in the International Pain Policy Fellowship, a program to assist LMICs, to improve patient access to pain medicines. Following the World Health Organization public health model for development of pain relief and palliative care, the Fellow, working with colleagues and mentors, has achieved initial successes: three forms of oral morphine (syrup, immediate-release tablets, and sustained-release tablets) are now manufactured in the country; health-care practitioners are receiving training in the use of opioids for pain relief; and a new national palliative care association has developed a palliative care training curriculum. However, long-term implementation efforts, funding, and technical assistance by governments, philanthropic organizations, and international partners are necessary to ensure that pain relief and palliative care become accessible by all in need in Nepal and other LMICs.

An examination of global and regional opioid consumption trends 1980-2011.

Despite expert recognition that strong opioid analgesics are the cornerstone of treatment for moderate to severe pain, most of the world's population lacks adequate availability of opioids. Moreover, great disparities in availability of opioids continue to exist between higher- and lower-to-middle-income countries. This study examined more than 30 years of consumption data reported to the International Narcotics Control Board, from 1980 to 2011, for five opioids that are indicated for the treatment of moderate to severe pain: fentanyl, hydromorphone, morphine, oxycodone, and pethidine. As such, this study offers a regional and global perspective on opioid consumption, providing an indication of preparedness for treating moderate to severe pain. Countries are categorized according to the World Health Organization's six geographical regions. Morphine equivalence (ME) statistics were calculated for each study drug, allowing for equianalgesic comparisons between consumption of the study opioids and well as the ability to aggregate all study opioids (Total ME). The ME statistic is adjusted for country population, which allows for uniform global-, regional-, and country-level equianalgesic comparisons of consumption of morphine with other opioids. Although overall trend lines revealed general increases by region, profound inequities in opioid consumption continue to abound globally.

Ensuring patient access to essential medicines while minimizing harmful use: a revised World Health Organization tool to improve national drug control policy.

In 2011, the World Health Organization (WHO) published a series of 21 guidelines to assist governments in improving their national drug control laws, regulations, and administrative procedures to promote the availability of controlled medicines for pain relief and for a variety of acute and chronic diseases and conditions. These guidelines ultimately are designed to encourage the development of policies designed to fulfill a country's dual obligation concerning these medicines: to prevent their abuse, diversion and trafficking while ensuring access for medical and scientific purposes. This article summarizes each guideline and outlines the constituents who can actively participate in making controlled medicines available to the patients who need them. It is hoped that representatives of governments and medical institutions, as well as health care professionals, will commonly and effectively use the revised WHO guidelines as a policy change tool.

Improving the availability and accessibility of opioids for the treatment of pain: the International Pain Policy Fellowship.

Opioid analgesics are simultaneously indispensable medicines for the treatment of moderate to severe pain and are harmful when abused. The challenge for governments is to balance the obligation to prevent diversion, trafficking, and abuse of opioids with the equally important obligation to ensure their availability and accessibility for the relief of pain and suffering. Over the last 30 years, significant progress has been made toward improving access to opioids as measured by increasing global medical opioid consumption. However, this progress is marked by ongoing large disparities among countries, with most increases in medical opioid consumption attributed to high-income countries, not low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The International Pain Policy Fellowship (IPPF) was developed by the Pain & Policy Studies Group, with the central goal of developing national leaders from LMICs and empowering them to improve availability and accessibility of opioids for the treatment of pain. To date, two classes of fellows have been selected, representing 17 fellows from 15 countries. Progress achieved by the leadership of three fellows from Sierra Leone, Colombia, and Serbia is highlighted in this paper. The fellows from each country were successful at initiating collaboration with relevant governmental bodies, national authorities, and professional societies, which resulted in a new supply of oral opioids in Sierra Leone and Serbia, and improvements in the distribution of already available opioids in Colombia. All fellows were instrumental in facilitating evaluation of national policy. The IPPF program empowers fellows with the necessary knowledge, skills, and guidance to improve the availability and accessibility of opioids for the treatment of pain.

Improving state pain policies: recent progress and continuing opportunities.

The National Institutes of Health reports that 100 million Americans suffer from chronic pain, including pain associated with the disease of cancer. Painful conditions can strike anyone, including cancer patients and cancer survivors. Unrelieved severe pain can limit a person's functioning and sometimes even destroy the will to live. When the quality of pain relief provided is inadequate, it is usually the result of failures to apply existing knowledge about pain and its treatment, including the appropriate use of opioids. But pain relief also can be affected by the regulatory environment and fear of being investigated for excessive prescribing. The importance of evaluating and improving policies governing pain management has been recognized by national and international authorities, including the Institute of Medicine and the World Health Organization. A pilot examination of state laws and regulatory policies demonstrated that they contained a number of outdated medical concepts and prescribing restrictions and did not contain key elements of law that can make pain management a priority for licensed medical practitioners. The Pain & Policy Studies Group developed a research program to evaluate US federal and state policy governing the medical use of pain medication. This article describes 3 national policy evaluations and how the results are being used to document improvements in state pain policies. An emerging role for clinicians and their professional organizations to improve their state's pain policies is discussed.

State policy affecting pain management: recent improvements and the positive impact of regulatory health policies.

Criteria-driven policy analysis resources from the University of Wisconsin Pain and Policy Studies Group (PPSG) evaluated drug control and professional practice policies that can influence use of controlled substances for pain management, and documented changes over a 3-year period. Additional research was needed to determine the extent of change, the types of messages contained in the policies, and what has contributed to changing policy content. Four research aims guided this study: (1) evaluate change between 2000 and 2003 of state policy that can affect pain relief, (2) describe content differences for statutes, regulations, guidelines, and policy statements, (3) evaluate differences between policies specific to pain management and policies governing general healthcare practice, and (4) compare content of policies specific to pain management created by healthcare regulatory boards to those created by state legislatures. Results showed that more current policies, especially policies regulating health professionals, tend to encourage pain management and avoid language that restricts professional decision-making and patient treatment. In addition, pain policies from healthcare regulatory boards were generally less restrictive than statutes or policies that govern general healthcare practice. These findings suggest that the positive policy change results primarily from state medical, pharmacy, and nursing boards adopting policies promoting pain management and the use of opioids, while containing few if any restrictions. Despite this improvement, further progress can be made when states continue to abrogate additional restrictions or clinically obsolete provisions from policies. PPSG policy evaluations provide guidance to lawmakers, healthcare regulators, and clinicians who are striving to achieve balanced policy, an attainable but redoubtable goal, to benefit patient care.

Progress to achieve balanced state policy relevant to pain management and palliative care: 2000-2003.

State laws and regulatory policies govern healthcare practice, including the prescribing, dispensing, and administering of opioid analgesics to treat pain. A number of national healthcare and law enforcement organizations have identified drug regulatory policy as a potential barrier to pain relief and palliative care, and have called for evaluation and removal. This article summarizes and discusses the results of an innovative evaluation methodology that was used to produce three policy analysis tools, including one report that graded and ranked states based on the quality of their policies related to pain management and palliative care (called a Progress Report Card [PRC]). The PRC development and implementation was a first-of-a-kind study that compared pain policies in all states over a three year period according to the same evaluation criteria. Results demonstrate significant progress to improve policy in a number of states during the study period, but also showed that most state policies are characterized by a lack "balance." In addition to providing examples of policy change in particular states, the relevance of these findings to current policy issues, including the importance of communicating and implementing new policies is discussed. The need for partnerships between the healthcare and law enforcement communities is emphasized to create a more positive regulatory environment for pain relief and palliative care, which ultimately will benefit patient care.