Government Mandated Consent Dramatically Reduces Pediatric Urologist Opioid Utilization for Outpatient and Minor Emergency Surgeries.

PURPOSE: Postoperative opioids are overprescribed in the United States. In November 2016 the State of Pennsylvania required an opioid consent for minors. Our hypothesis is that this mandate decreased postoperative opioid prescriptions in our division. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients who received a urological outpatient or minor emergency procedure from August 2015 to August 2019 were identified. Surgeries performed within 6 months after mandate implementation were excluded to account for the transition period. Perioperative data including case type were extracted by a clinical data warehouse from preexisting fields within the health record. The frequencies of postoperative prescriptions, delayed prescriptions and emergency department encounters were assessed. A multivariable logistic regression to identify predictors of opioid prescription at discharge was performed. RESULTS: A total of 4,349 patients were analyzed. The frequency of postsurgical opioid prescriptions decreased from 45.3% to 2.6% (p <0.001). The median morphine milligram equivalent decreased by 22.5 among children prescribed an opioid (p <0.001). Rates of an emergency department visits (3% vs 2.7%) or delayed nonopioid prescriptions (0.8% vs 1.2%) within 30 days of discharge were unchanged (p >0.05). Fewer patients received a delayed opioid prescription after mandate implementation (0.03% vs 0.5%, p <0.001). Female patients were less likely (OR 0.309, 95% CI 0.195-0.491; p <0.001) to receive opioids prior to but not after the mandate (OR 0.309, 95% CI 0.544-2.035; p=0.122). Increasing age was predictive of receiving an opioid before (OR 1.187, 95% CI 1.157-1.218; p <0.001) and after (OR 1.241, 95% CI 1.186-1.299; p <0.001) the mandate. CONCLUSIONS: A state mandated opioid consent for minors greatly reduced post-urological surgery opioid prescription rates without increasing rates of readmission or delayed prescriptions.

Type of anesthesia and quality of recovery in male patients undergoing lumbar surgery: a randomized trial comparing propofol-remifentanil total i.v. anesthesia with sevoflurane anesthesia.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that women achieve a better quality of postoperative recovery from total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) than from inhalation anesthesia, but the effect of anesthesia type on recovery in male patients is unclear. This study therefore compared patient recovery between males undergoing lumbar surgery who received TIVA and those who received sevoflurane anesthesia. METHODS: Eighty male patients undergoing elective one- or two-level primary transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) were randomly divided into two groups: the TIVA group (maintenance was achieved with propofol and remifentanil) or sevoflurane group (SEVO group: maintenance was achieved with sevoflurane and remifentanil). The quality of recovery-40 questionnaire (QoR-40) was administered before surgery and on postoperative days 1 and 2 (POD1 and POD2). Pain scores, postoperative nausea and vomiting, postoperative hospital stay, anesthesia consumption, and adverse effects were recorded. RESULTS: The QoR-40 scores were similar on the three points (Preoperative, POD1 and POD2). Pain scores were significantly lower in the SEVO group than in the TIVA group on POD1 (30.6 vs 31.4; P = 0.01) and POD2 (32 vs 33; P = 0.002). There was no significant difference in the postoperative hospital stay or complications in the postanesthesia care unit between the TIVA group and the SEVO group. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that the quality of recovery is not significantly different between male TLIF surgery patients who receive TIVA and those who receive sevoflurane anesthesia. Patients in the TIVA group had better postoperative analgesic effect on POD2. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This was registered at http://www.chictr.org.cn (registration number ChiCTR-IOR-16007987, registration date: 24/02/2016).

Drug Enforcement Agency 2014 Hydrocodone Rescheduling Rule and Opioid Dispensing after Surgery.

BACKGROUND: In 2014, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency reclassified hydrocodone from Schedule III to Schedule II of the Controlled Substances Act, resulting in new restrictions on refills. The authors hypothesized that hydrocodone rescheduling led to decreases in total opioid dispensing within 30 days of surgery and reduced new long-term opioid dispensing among surgical patients. METHODS: The authors studied privately insured, opioid-naïve adults undergoing 10 general or orthopedic surgeries between 2011 and 2015. The authors conducted a differences-in-differences analysis that compared overall opioid dispensing before versus after the rescheduling rule for patients treated by surgeons who frequently prescribed hydrocodone before rescheduling (i.e., patients who were functionally exposed to rescheduling's impact) while adjusting for secular trends via a comparison group of patients treated by surgeons who rarely prescribed hydrocodone (i.e., unexposed patients). The primary outcome was any filled opioid prescription between 90 and 180 days after surgery; secondary outcomes included the 30-day refill rate and the amount of opioids dispensed initially and at 30 days postoperatively. RESULTS: The sample included 65,136 patients. The percentage of patients filling a prescription beyond 90 days was similar after versus before rescheduling (absolute risk difference, -1.1%; 95% CI, -2.3% to 0.1%; P = 0.084). The authors estimated the rescheduling rule to be associated with a 45.4-mg oral morphine equivalent increase (difference-in-differences estimate; 95% CI, 34.2-56.7 mg; P < 0.001) in initial opioid dispensing, a 4.1% absolute decrease (95% CI, -5.5% to -2.7%; P < 0.001) in refills within 30 days, and a 37.7-mg oral morphine equivalent increase (95% CI, 20.6-54.8 mg; P = 0.008) in opioids dispensed within 30 days. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients treated by surgeons who frequently prescribed hydrocodone before the Drug Enforcement Agency 2014 hydrocodone rescheduling rule, rescheduling did not impact long-term opioid receipt, although it was associated with an increase in opioid dispensing within 30 days of surgery.

Spillover Effect of Opioid Reduction Interventions From Adult to Pediatric Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Procedure-specific prescribing guidelines and trainee education have reduced opioid overprescribing in adult surgical patients, but tailored interventions do not yet exist for children. It is unknown what effect these adult interventions have had on postoperative opioid prescribing in children at the same institution, where trainees rotate across both adult and pediatric services. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study of patients (<18 y) undergoing pediatric surgery (PS), pediatric otolaryngology (ENT), or pediatric urology (URO) procedures at a single tertiary academic center assessed opioid doses per patient before (January 01, 2015 to September 30, 2016) and after (January 01, 2017 to March 31, 2018) opioid prescribing guidelines and trainee education were instituted for adult laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Patient demographics, postoperative opioid prescribing, opioid refills, and emergency department (ED) visits <21 d after surgery were compared using chi-squared analyses and t-tests. Interrupted time-series analyses (ITSA) assessed changes in the rate of opioid prescribing pre- and postintervention for each subspecialty. RESULTS: There were 3371 patients preintervention and 2439 patients postintervention. After the intervention, fewer patients were prescribed opioids (ENT: 97% versus 93%, P < 0.001; URO: 98% versus 94%, P < 0.001; PS: 61% versus 25%, P < 0.001) and fewer opioid doses were prescribed in each prescription (ENT: 63.8 ± 26.1 versus 50.8 ± 22.0 doses, P < 0.001; URO: 33.5 ± 23.4 versus 22.1 ± 11.3, P < 0.001; PS: 20.4 ± 12.8 versus 13.8 ± 11.4 doses, P < 0.001). There were no changes in opioid refill or ED visit rates postintervention. A decreasing rate in ENT prescribing was seen preintervention, with no significant change postintervention (-2.3 ± 1.1 versus -3.3 ± 0.7; P = 0.24). Whereas, the rate of decrease in PS and URO prescribing significantly slowed postintervention (PS: -2.0 ± 0.1 versus -0.9 ± 0.1, P < 0.001; URO: -4.2 ± 0.2 versus -2.3 ± 0.5, P = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Opioid prescribing rates are decreasing, but adult interventions did not achieve reductions in pediatric opioid prescribing at the same institution. There was no concomitant rise in postoperative ED visits or opioid refills as prescribing declined, indicating that the risks of reducing opioid prescriptions may be minimal. Development of evidence-based, procedure-specific prescribing guidelines that specifically address pediatric patients are needed to effectively minimize opioid overprescribing in this population.

The perception of barriers concerning opioid medicines: A survey examining differences between policy makers, healthcare professionals and other stakeholders.

BACKGROUND: In many countries, the consumption of opioid medicines is too low to meet population needs. Discussions within the Access To Opioid Medication in Europe project indicated that there may be significant differences in the perception of barriers for their adequate use, depending on the stakeholders. AIM: The aim of this study was to examine the perception of barriers and their impact concerning opioid medicines, comparing policy makers, healthcare professionals working in the field of pain management, palliative care or harm reduction and other stakeholders. DESIGN: Data were collected using a questionnaire partially constructed from existing surveys, reviewed for content validity by four experts and pilot-tested in Latvia. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Participants of the Access to Opioid Medication in Europe national conferences were invited to complete the questionnaire. Stakeholder groups were compared using non-parametric rank-sum tests. RESULTS: In total, 199 participants (54%) in seven countries completed the questionnaire. Most frequently rated major barriers included lack of financial resources and inadequate knowledge, skills and training among policy makers (55%-66%). Overall, policy makers perceived issues less often as major barriers or having major impact (29% barrier, 32% impact) compared to other stakeholders (36%-42% barrier, 39%-51% impact). Significant differences were seen on several aspects. For example, excessive regulation or bureaucracy for prescribing was rated as having major impact by 55%-57% of healthcare professionals in contrast to only 20% of the policy makers (p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: Multiple barriers may play an important role, partly depending on the perspective of the stakeholder involved. Hence, when addressing perceived barriers, it is important to include all relevant stakeholder groups. Only then, effective and widely supported solutions can be implemented.

Recommendations for Prescribing Opioids for People With Traumatic Brain Injury.

Our objective was to make recommendations intended to reduce the rate of opioid misuse and overdose for a particularly high-risk group of people with traumatic brain injury (TBI). A consensus process conducted with TBI researchers and expert practitioners developed practical recommendations to inform prescribing of opioids for people with TBI. After determining key general principles for prescribing opioids for people with TBI, 6 TBI-specific recommendations were developed, 1 for acute pain in the agitated patient with TBI, 3 recommendations to be considered before prescribing an opioid, and 2 for follow-up and use by mental health and substance use disorder providers. While there is much needed research to examine the relationship between opioid misuse and TBI, the present recommendations provide at least some clinical considerations that might serve to prevent further deaths among a high-risk group.

Inpatient Opioid Use After Pancreatectomy: Opportunities for Reducing Initial Opioid Exposure in Cancer Surgery Patients.

BACKGROUND: Despite advances in enhanced surgical recovery programs, strategies limiting postoperative inpatient opioid exposure have not been optimized for pancreatic surgery. The primary aims of this study were to analyze the magnitude and variations in post-pancreatectomy opioid administration and to characterize predictors of low and high inpatient use. METHODS: Clinical characteristics and inpatient oral morphine equivalents (OMEs) were downloaded from electronic records for consecutive pancreatectomy patients at a high-volume institution between March 2016 and August 2017. Regression analyses identified predictors of total OMEs as well as highest and lowest quartiles. RESULTS: Pancreatectomy was performed for 158 patients (73% pancreaticoduodenectomy). Transversus abdominus plane (TAP) block was performed for 80% (n = 127) of these patients, almost always paired with intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV-PCA), whereas 15% received epidural alone. All the patients received scheduled non-opioid analgesics (median, 2). The median total OME administered was 423 mg (range 0-4362 mg). Higher total OME was associated with preoperative opioid prescriptions (p < 0.001), longer hospital length of stay (LOS; p < 0.001), and no epidural (p = 0.006). The lowest and best quartile cutoff was 180 mg of OME or less, whereas the highest and worst quartile cutoff began at 892.5 mg. After adjustment for inpatient team, only epidural use [odds ratio (OR) 0.3; p = 0.04] predicted lowest-quartile OME. Preoperative opioid prescriptions (OR 8.1; p < 0.001), longer operative time (OR 3.4; p = 0.05), and longer LOS (OR 1.1; p = 0.007) predicted highest-quartile OME. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative opioid prescriptions and longer LOS were associated with increased inpatient OME, whereas epidural use reduced inpatient OME. Understanding the predictors of inpatient opioid use and the variables predicting the lowest and highest quartiles can inform decision-making regarding preoperative counseling, regional anesthetic block choice, and novel inpatient opioid weaning strategies to reduce initial postoperative opioid exposure.

Setting Expectations, Following Orders, Safety, and Standardization: Clinicians' Strategies to Guide Difficult Conversations About Opioid Prescribing.

BACKGROUND: Evidence has continued to accumulate regarding the potential risks of treating chronic pain with long-term opioid therapy (LTOT). Clinical practice guidelines now encourage clinicians to implement practices designed to reduce opioid-related risks. Yet how clinicians implement these guidelines within the context of the patient encounter has received little attention. OBJECTIVE: This secondary analysis aimed to identify and describe clinicians' strategies for managing prescription opioid misuse and aberrant behaviors among patients prescribed LTOT for chronic pain. DESIGN: Individual interviews guided by a semi-structured interview protocol probed: (1) methods clinicians utilize to reduce prescription opioid misuse and address aberrant opioid-related behaviors; (2) how clinicians respond to misuse; and (3) resources and constraints faced in managing and treating misuse among their patients. PARTICIPANTS: Interviews were conducted with 24 physicians and nurse practitioners, representing 22 Veterans Health Administration (VA) facilities across the USA, who had one or more patients in their clinical panels who were prescribed LTOT for the treatment of chronic non-cancer pain. APPROACH: Qualitative content analysis was the analytic approach utilized. A codebook was developed iteratively following group coding and discussion. All transcripts were coded with the finalized codebook. Quotes pertaining to key themes were retrieved and, following careful review, sorted into themes, which were then further categorized into sub-themes. Quotes that exemplified key sub-themes were selected for inclusion. KEY RESULTS: We detail the challenges clinicians describe in navigating conversations with patients around prescription opioid misuse, which include patient objection as well as clinician ambivalence. We identify verbal heuristics as one strategy clinicians utilize to structure these difficult conversations, and describe four heuristics: setting expectations, following orders, safety, and standardization. CONCLUSION: Clinicians frequently use verbal heuristics to routinize and increase the efficiency of care management discussions related to opioid prescribing, redirect responsibility, and defuse the potential emotional charge of the encounter.

Army and Navy ECHO Pain Telementoring Improves Clinician Opioid Prescribing for Military Patients: an Observational Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Opioid overdose deaths occur in civilian and military populations and are the leading cause of accidental death in the USA. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether ECHO Pain telementoring regarding best practices in pain management and safe opioid prescribing yielded significant declines in opioid prescribing. DESIGN: A 4-year observational cohort study at military medical treatment facilities worldwide. PARTICIPANTS: Patients included 54.6% females and 46.4% males whose primary care clinicians (PCCs) opted to participate in ECHO Pain; the comparison group included 39.9% females and 60.1% males whose PCCs opted not to participate in ECHO Pain. INTERVENTION: PCCs attended 2-h weekly Chronic Pain and Opioid Management TeleECHO Clinic (ECHO Pain), which included pain and addiction didactics, case-based learning, and evidence-based recommendations. ECHO Pain sessions were offered 46 weeks per year. Attendance ranged from 1 to 3 sessions (47.7%), 4-19 (32.1%, or > 20 (20.2%). MAIN MEASURES: This study assessed whether clinician participation in Army and Navy Chronic Pain and Opioid Management TeleECHO Clinic (ECHO Pain) resulted in decreased prescription rates of opioid analgesics and co-prescribing of opioids and benzodiazepines. Measures included opioid prescriptions, morphine milligram equivalents (MME), and days of opioid and benzodiazepine co-prescribing per patient per year. KEY RESULTS: PCCs participating in ECHO Pain had greater percent declines than the comparison group in (a) annual opioid prescriptions per patient (- 23% vs. - 9%, P < 0.001), (b) average MME prescribed per patient/year (-28% vs. -7%, p < .02), (c) days of co-prescribed opioid and benzodiazepine per opioid user per year (-53% vs. -1%, p < .001), and (d) the number of opioid users (-20.2% vs. -8%, p < .001). Propensity scoring transformation-adjusted results were consistent with the opioid prescribing and MME results. CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated by PCCs who opted to participate in ECHO Pain had greater declines in opioid-related prescriptions than patients whose PCCs opted not to participate.

Implementation fidelity of patient-centered prescription label to promote opioid safe use.

PURPOSE: Patient-centered labels may improve safe medication use, but implementation challenges limit use. We assessed implementation of a patient-centered "PRN" (as needed) label entitled "Take-Wait-Stop" (TWS) with three deconstructed steps replacing traditional wording. METHODS: As part of a larger investigation, patients received TWS prescriptions (eg, Take: 1 pill if you have pain; Wait: at least 4 h before taking again; Stop: do not take more than 6 pills in 24 h). Prescriptions labels recorded at follow-up were classified into three categories: (1) one-step wording (Take 1 pill every 4 h [without daily limits]), (2) two-step wording (Take 1 pill every 4 h; do not exceed 6 pills/day), and (3) three-step wording. There were three subtypes of three-step wording: (3a) three-step, not TWS (three deconstructed steps, not necessarily TWS wording), (3b) TWS format, employing three steps with leading verbs, but "with additions or replacements" (eg, replaced "do not take" with "do not exceed"), and (3c) verbatim TWS. RESULTS: Two hundred eleven participants completed follow-up. Mean age was 44.3 years (SD 14.3); 44% were male. One-step bottles represented 12% (n = 25) of the sample, whereas 26% (n = 55) had two-step wording. The majority (44%, n = 93) had three-deconstructed steps, not TWS (3a); 16% (n = 34) retained TWS structure, but not verbatim (3b). Only 2% (n = 4) displayed verbatim TWS wording (3c). All category three labels (utilizing deconstructed instructions) were considered adequate implementation (62%). CONCLUSIONS: Exact intervention adherence was not achieved in the majority of cases, limiting impact. Nonetheless, community pharmacies were responsive to new instructions, but higher implementation reliability requires additional supports.

Efficacy and Practicality of Opioid Therapy in Japanese Chronic Noncancer Pain Patients.

BACKGROUND: Many Japanese adults suffer from chronic pain. However, 50% of these individuals discontinue treatment despite the persistence of pain. Both clinicians and patients in Japan tend to be concerned about the safety and efficacy of opioid therapy, and the use of opioids in chronic non-cancer pain remains less common in Japan than elsewhere. AIMS: This study examined the effects of opioid therapy on the daily lives of patients with chronic noncancer pain in Japan, where use of opioids for this type of pain remains uncommon. DESIGN: Prospective cross-sectional questionnaire study. SETTING: Data were collected over two periods, between March and April 2014 at one hospital, and between February and April 2015 at the other hospital. Subjects were recruited at the respective clinics by the study interviewer between March 1, 2014 and April 15, 2014 and between February 1, 2015 and April 15, 2015. PARTICIPANTS/SUBJECTS: This study included 34 outpatients with chronic non-cancer pain who were being treated with opioid analgesics at pain clinics in two hospitals in Sapporo. METHODS: Thirty-four Japanese patients receiving opioid medications for chronic noncancer pain in outpatient pain clinics were enrolled. Participants underwent interviews and completed the Japanese versions of the Short Form 36 (SF-36v2) and the Coping Strategies Questionnaire (CSQ). RESULTS: Sleep disruption, claiming compensation for work-related accidents, and current pain level were negatively correlated with opioid effectiveness (p < .05). Additionally, opioid effectiveness was negatively correlated with the catastrophizing subscale of the CSQ (r = -0.50, p < .01). The effects of opioid therapy had a low positive correlation with the emotional functioning role subscale of the SF-36v2 (r = 0.38, p < .05). Daily equivalent morphine dose was positively correlated with opioid therapy duration, interference with appetite, and current pain intensity. Morphine dose was also positively correlated with scores for the catastrophizing subscale of the CSQ (r = 0.36, p < .05) and negatively correlated with scores in all subdomains of the SF-36v2. CONCLUSIONS: It is important to focus on adaptive, cognitive, and emotional factors, such as emotional role functioning, to determine the efficacy of opioid treatment for chronic noncancer pain. Moreover, patients with catastrophizing significantly increased their morphine doses, resulting in an increased risk of overdose.

Intranasal Sufentanil Versus Intravenous Morphine for Acute Pain in the Emergency Department: A Randomized Pilot Trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients in the United States frequently seek medical attention in the emergency department (ED) to address their pain. The intranasal (i.n.) route provides a safe, effective, and painless alternative method of drug administration. Sufentanil is an inexpensive synthetic opioid with a high therapeutic index and rapid onset of action, making it an attractive agent for management of acute pain in the ED. OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of i.n. sufentanil as the primary analgesic for acute pain in the ED. METHODS: This was a single-center, prospective, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, controlled trial that evaluated the use of i.n. sufentanil 0.7 µg/kg via mucosal atomizer device vs. intravenous morphine 0.1 mg/kg in adult patients who presented to the ED with acute pain. The primary outcome was patient's pain score at 10 min after administration of intervention. Secondary outcomes were adverse events, the need for rescue analgesia, and patient satisfaction after treatment. RESULTS: Thirty patients were enrolled in each group. There was no significant difference in pain scores at 10 min after administration of intervention (sufentanil: 2.0, interquartile range = 2.0-3.3 vs. morphine: 3.0, interquartile range = 2.0-5.3, p = 0.198). No serious adverse events were reported. Rescue analgesia was not requested in either group. No significant difference in median satisfaction scores was found. CONCLUSION: The use of i.n. sufentanil at 0.7 µg/kg/dose resulted in rapid and safe analgesia with comparable efficacy to i.v. morphine for up to 30 min in patients who presented with acute pain in the ED.

Academic Detailing to Improve Opioid Safety: Implementation Lessons from a Qualitative Evaluation.

Objective: Academic detailing (AD) is a promising intervention to address the growing morbidity and mortality associated with opioids. While AD has been shown to be effective in improving provider prescribing practices across a range of conditions, it is unclear how best to implement AD. The present study was designed to identify key lessons for implementation based on a model AD program in the Veterans Health Administration (VA). Design: Qualitative process evaluation using semistructured interviews. Setting: Seven VA health care systems in the Sierra Pacific region. Subjects: Current and former academic detailers (N = 10) and VA providers with varying exposure to AD (high, low, or no; N = 20). Methods: Semistructured interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. We used a team-based, mixed inductive and deductive approach guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Results: Key lessons identified by academic detailers and providers coalesced around key themes: 1) one-on-one sessions customized to the provider's patient population are most useful; 2) leadership plays a critical role in supporting providers' participation in AD programs; 3) tracking academic detailer and provider performance is important for improving performance for both groups; 4) academic detailers play a key role in motivating provider behavior change and thus training in Motivational Interviewing is highly valuable; and 5) academic detailers noted that networking is important for sharing implementation strategies and resources. Conclusions: Identifying and incorporating these key lessons into the implementation of complex interventions like AD are critical to facilitating uptake of evidence-based interventions addressing the opioid epidemic.

Unsolicited Reporting to Prescribers of Opioid Analgesics by a State Prescription Drug Monitoring Program: An Observational Study with Matched Comparison Group.

Objective: State prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) can help detect individuals with multiple provider episodes (MPEs; also referred to as doctor/pharmacy shopping), an indicator of prescription drug abuse and/or diversion. Although unsolicited reporting by PDMPs to prescribers of opioid analgesics is thought to be an important practice in reducing MPEs and the potential harm associated with them, evidence of its effectiveness is mixed. This exploratory research evaluates the impact of unsolicited reports sent by Massachusetts' PDMP to the prescribers of persons with MPEs. Methods: Individuals with MPEs were identified from PDMP records between January 2010 and July 2011 as individuals having Schedule II prescriptions (at least one prescription being an opioid) from four or more distinct prescribers and four or more distinct pharmacies within six months. Based on available MA-PDMP resources, an unsolicited report containing the patient's 12-month prescription history was sent to prescribers of a subset of patients who met the MPE threshold; a comparison group closely matched on demographics and baseline prescription history, whose prescribers were not sent a report, was generated using propensity score matching. The prescription history of each group was examined for 12 months before and after the intervention. Results: There were eighty-four patients (intervention group) whose prescribers received an unsolicited report and 504 matched patients (comparison group) whose prescribers were not sent a report. Regression analyses indicated significantly greater decreases in the number of Schedule II opioid prescriptions (P < 0.01), number of prescribers visited (P < 0.01), number of pharmacies used (P < 0.01), dosage units (P < 0.01), total days' supply (P < 0.01), total morphine milligram equivalents (MME; P < 0.01), and average daily MME (P < 0.05) for the intervention group relative to the comparison group. A post hoc analysis suggested that the observed intervention effects were greater for individuals with an average daily dose of less than 100 MMEs. Conclusions: This study suggests that PDMP unsolicited reporting to prescribers can help reduce risk measures in patients' prescription histories, which may improve health outcomes for patients receiving opioid analgesics from multiple providers.

Fifteen-minute consultation: Pain relief for children made simple-a pragmatic approach to prescribing oral analgesia in the postcodeine era.

What are the most effective doses of simple oral analgesics such as paracetamol and ibuprofen for pain relief in children? Why can't I prescribe codeine phosphate for children anymore? Is oral morphine really a safe alternative to codeine phosphate, and if so what dose should I prescribe? These questions are frequently asked by clinicians who wish to give analgesics to children for pain relief. In this article I will address these questions and describe a pragmatic approach for pain relief using oral analgesics based on the best evidence available and my experience as a consultant paediatric anaesthetist.

Something for pain: Responsible opioid use in emergency medicine.

The United States is currently experiencing a public health crisis of opioid addiction, which has its genesis in an industry marketing effort that successfully encouraged clinicians to prescribe opioids liberally, and asserted the safety of prescribing opioids for chronic non-cancer pain, despite a preponderance of evidence demonstrating the risks of dependence and misuse. The resulting rise in opioid use has pushed drug overdose deaths in front of motor vehicle collisions to become the leading cause of accidental death in the country. Emergency providers frequently treat patients for complications of opioid abuse, and also manage patients with acute and chronic pain, for which opioids are routinely prescribed. Emergency providers are therefore well positioned to both prevent new cases of opioid misuse and initiate appropriate treatment of existing opioid addicts. In opioid-naive patients, this is accomplished by a careful consideration of the likelihood of benefit and harm of an opioid prescription for acute pain. If opioids are prescribed, the chance of harm is reduced by matching the number of pills prescribed to the expected duration of pain and selecting an opioid preparation with low abuse liability. Patients who present to acute care with exacerbations of chronic pain or painful conditions associated with opioid misuse are best managed by treating symptoms with opioid alternatives and encouraging treatment for opioid addiction.

Addressing Safe Opioid Monitoring Practices Using an Interprofessional Approach.

OBJECTIVE: The aims of the project are to increase knowledge related to opioids and improve adherence to evidence-based interventions for sedation monitoring and assessment in adult inpatients receiving opioids for pain through delivery of an interprofessional online program. BACKGROUND: Preventable opioid-induced respiratory depression is a patient safety risk in hospitals. Sedation and respiratory assessment and monitoring guidelines and tools are available to improve practice. METHODS: An interprofessional team identified organization-specific drivers of opioid-induced sedation and respiratory depression using process improvement methodology, developed interventions, and evaluated clinician opioid knowledge and documentation practice. RESULTS: Opioid knowledge survey responses improved after the interventions. Audits showing improved appropriate documentation by RNs of the correct sedation scale were performed over 2 separate 3-month periods. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians demonstrated increased knowledge about newly adopted sedation and monitoring practices targeted to prevent opioid-induced respiratory depression.

The Role of Pharmacogenomics in Anesthesia Pharmacology.

The field of pharmacogenomics seeks to identify the impact of genetic variants on drug dosing, response, metabolism, and safety outcomes. The narrow therapeutic indices for anesthesia drugs, variability of patient responses to anesthesia, and the risks associated with surgery make anesthetics and the perioperative period prime targets for pharmacogenetic research. Anesthesia providers strive to optimize anesthesia delivery and patient outcomes and to specifically reduce anesthesia-related risks and negative outcomes. Despite pharmacogenomics emerging from the field of anesthesia, the most significant advances to date in the understanding and application of genetics to pharmacology have occurred outside of anesthesiology. This chapter provides an overview of genetic concepts fundamental to understanding the pharmacogenetics of anesthesia practice and presents the current state of the science with respect to the genetic influence on the response to volatile and intravenous anesthetic agents and opioid receptor agonists commonly used in anesthesia practice. In addition, the chapter delineates U.S. Food and Drug Administration labeling tenets for pharmacogenetics, discusses clinical implications of pharmacogenomics for family members, and highlights the potential for future paradigm shifts in pharmacogenomics of anesthesia practice.

Delivery room hospice.

Advances in perinatal science over the past five decades have reduced the practical 'threshold of viability' by approximately one week every 10 years such that survivors are expected as early as 22 weeks. Ethical standards regarding treatment of this periviable patient population remain enigmatic. CONCLUSION: We review limitations in the current ethical rationale for caring for these infants in the delivery room and introduce an alternative utilising a delivery room hospice care approach involving the administration of opioids.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention opioid guidelines: potential for unintended consequences and will they be abused?

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have published guidelines for opioid prescribing, with the goal of helping guide clinicians to make safe prescribing choices. In the form of 12 statements, the CDC offers guidance that at times is not supported by the evidence or introduces new concepts (such as a requirement that opioids improve function). Our objective was to examine the new guidelines in terms of how well they could strike the balance between keeping opioids accessible to those who need them while appropriately restricting their use. WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: The CDC guidelines offer some reasonable and laudable guidance, but they also make some recommendations which are not supported by current scientific evidence. We also noted that the urgent need for greater education among opioid prescribers was not addressed in the new guidelines.