Medication Overuse in Chronic Pain.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Chronic pain is usually managed by various pharmacotherapies after exhausting the conservative modalities such as over-the-counter choices. The goal of this review is to investigate current state of opioids and non-opioid medication overuse that includes NSAIDs, skeletal muscle relaxants, antidepressants, membrane stabilization agents, and benzodiazepine. How to minimize medication overuse and achieve better outcome in chronic pain management? RECENT FINDINGS: Although antidepressants and membrane stabilization agents contribute to the crucial components for neuromodulation, opioids were frequently designated as a rescue remedy in chronic pain since adjunct analgesics usually do not provide instantaneous relief. The updated CDC guideline for prescribing opioids has gained widespread attention via media exposure. Both patients and prescribers are alerted to respond to the opioid epidemic and numerous complications. However, there has been overuse of non-opioid adjunct analgesics that caused significant adverse effects in addition to concurrent opioid consumption. It is a common practice to extrapolate the WHO three-step analgesic ladder for cancer pain to apply in non-cancer pain that emphasizes solely on pharmacologic therapy which may result in overuse and escalation of opioids in non-cancer pain. There has been promising progress in non-pharmacologic therapies such as biofeedback, complementary, and alternative medicine to facilitate pain control instead of dependency on pharmacologic therapies. This review article presents the current state of medication overuse in chronic pain and proposes precaution to balance the risk and benefit ratio. It may serve as a premier for future study on clinical pathway for comprehensive chronic pain management and reduce medication overuse.

Comprehensive, Evidence-Based, Consensus Guidelines for Prescription of Opioids for Chronic Non-Cancer Pain from the American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP).

BACKGROUND: Opioid prescribing in the United States is decreasing, however, the opioid epidemic is continuing at an uncontrollable rate. Available data show a significant number of opioid deaths, primarily associated with illicit fentanyl use. It is interesting to also note that the data show no clear correlation between opioid prescribing (either number of prescriptions or morphine milligram equivalent [MME] per capita), opioid hospitalizations, and deaths. Furthermore, the data suggest that the 2016 guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have resulted in notable problems including increased hospitalizations and mental health disorders due to the lack of appropriate opioid prescribing as well as inaptly rapid tapering or weaning processes. Consequently, when examined in light of other policies and complications caused by COVID-19, a fourth wave of the opioid epidemic has been emerging. OBJECTIVES: In light of this, we herein seek to provide guidance for the prescription of opioids for the management of chronic non-cancer pain. These clinical practice guidelines are based upon a systematic review of both clinical and epidemiological evidence and have been developed by a panel of multidisciplinary experts assessing the quality of the evidence and the strength of recommendations and offer a clear explanation of logical relationships between various care options and health outcomes. METHODS: The methods utilized included the development of objectives and key questions for the various facets of opioid prescribing practice. Also utilized were employment of trustworthy standards, and appropriate disclosures of conflicts of interest(s). The literature pertaining to opioid use, abuse, effectiveness, and adverse consequences was reviewed. The recommendations were developed after the appropriate review of text and questions by a panel of multidisciplinary subject matter experts, who tabulated comments, incorporated changes, and developed focal responses to questions posed. The multidisciplinary panel finalized 20 guideline recommendations for prescription of opioids for chronic non-cancer pain. Summary of the results showed over 90% agreement for the final 20 recommendations with strong consensus. The consensus guidelines included 4 sections specific to opioid therapy with 1) ten recommendations particular to initial steps of opioid therapy; 2) five recommendations for assessment of effectiveness of opioid therapy; 3) three recommendations regarding monitoring adherence and side effects; and 4) two general, final phase recommendations. LIMITATIONS: There is a continued paucity of literature of long-term opioid therapy addressing chronic non-cancer pain. Further, significant biases exist in the preparation of guidelines, which has led to highly variable rules and regulations across various states. CONCLUSION: These guidelines were developed based upon a comprehensive review of the literature, consensus among expert panelists, and in alignment with patient preferences, and shared decision-making so as to improve the long-term pain relief and function in patients with chronic non-cancer pain. Consequently, it was concluded - and herein recommended - that chronic opioid therapy should be provided in low doses with appropriate adherence monitoring and understanding of adverse events only to those patients with a proven medical necessity, and who exhibit stable improvement in both pain relief and activities of daily function, either independently or in conjunction with other modalities of treatments.

Acute and chronic pain management in fibromyalgia: updates on pharmacotherapy.

Fibromyalgia (FM) is a mysterious pain syndrome with progressive and widespread pain, explicit areas of tender points, stiffness, sleep disturbance, fatigue, and psychological distress without any obvious disease. FM is commonly perceived as a condition of central pain and sensory augmentation. There are documented functional abnormalities in pain and sensory processing in FM. Central sensitization and lack of descending analgesic activity are the 2 leading mechanisms that have been demonstrated by advance in both basic and clinical research. The pathogenesis of FM may also be attributed to the genetic polymorphisms involving serotoninergic, dopaminergic, and catecholaminergic systems. Any psychiatric disorders and psychosocial influences in FM may also affect the severity of pain. The various external stimuli or trigger such as infection, trauma, and stress may all contribute to proceed to presentation of FM. The recent launches of 3 US Food and Drug Administration-approved pharmacotherapy for FM namely pregabalin, duloxetine, and milnacipran have certainly raised the profile of optimal chronic pain management. However, appropriate evaluation and efficacious management of acute pain has not been as well publicized as chronic pain in FM. Acute pain or flare up caused by any trauma or surgery certainly may present a real challenge for patients with FM and their health care providers. Pre-emptive analgesia and pro-active treatment may offer the momentum for acute pain control based on model of central sensitization and pain in FM. This review article on FM appraises the modern practice of multimodal therapy focus on both acute and chronic pain management. Meanwhile, the evolving nonpharmacological approach is summarized and stressed as an essential component of integrated care in FM.

A review of granisetron, 5-hydroxytryptamine3 receptor antagonists, and other antiemetics.

Nausea and vomiting are 2 of the most upsetting adverse reactions of chemotherapy. Current guidelines propose 5-hydroxytryptamine3 (5-HT3) receptor antagonists as a pharmacologic intervention for acute and delayed nausea and vomiting [chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV)] associated with moderately and highly emetogenic chemotherapy. Meanwhile, both postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and postdischarge nausea and vomiting are challenging situations after surgeries and procedures. Prophylactic and therapeutic combinations of antiemetics are recommended in patients at high risk of suffering from PONV and postdischarge nausea and vomiting. Granisetron (Kytril) is a selective 5-HT3 receptor antagonist that does not induce or inhibit the hepatic cytochrome P-450 system in vitro. There are also 4 other antagonists of 5-HT3 receptor (dolasetron, ondansetron, palonosetron, and tropisetron) being metabolized via the CYP2D6 and are subject to potential genetic polymorphism. The launch of a new class of antiemetics, the substance P/neurokinin1 receptor antagonists, was attributed to the scientific update on the central generator responsible for emesis and role of substance P. There has been mounting interest in exploring integrative medicine, either acupuncture or acustimulation of P6 (Nei-Kuwan), to complement the western medicine for prevention and management of nausea and vomiting. The potential application of cannabinoids, either alone or in combination with other agents of different mechanism, could contribute further to improve outcome in CINV. Implementation of future treatment guidelines for more effective management of CINV and PONV could certainly improve the efficacy and outcome of cancer and postoperative care.

Practical management of complex regional pain syndrome.

Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) describes a diversity of painful conditions following trauma, coupled with abnormal regulation of blood flow and sweating, trophic changes, and edema of skin. The excruciating pain and diverse autonomic dysfunctions in CRPS are disproportionate to any inciting and recovering event. CRPS type I is formerly identified as "reflex sympathetic dystrophy." CRPS type II is the new term for "causalgia" that always coexists with documented nerve injury. The present diagnostic criteria of CRPS I and II depend solely on meticulous history and physical examination without any confirmation by specific test procedure (or gold standard). There are only few clinical studies with large-scale randomized trials of pharmacologic agents on the treatment of CRPS. Bisphosphonates have been studied in multiple controlled trials, based on theoretical benefit of bone resorption, to offer pain relief and functional improvement in patients with CRPS. Many current rationales in treatment of CRPS (such as topical agents, antiepileptic drugs, tricyclic antidepressants, and opioids) are mainly dependent on efficacy originate in other common conditions of neuropathic pain. There are additional innovative therapies on CRPS that are still in infancy. No wonder all the treatment of individual CRPS case nowadays is pragmatic at best. Although the interventional therapies in CRPS (such as nerve blockade, sympathetic block, spinal cord and peripheral nerve stimulation, implantable spinal medication pumps, and chemical and surgical sympathectomy) may offer more rapid response, yet it is still controversial with unpredictable outcome. Nevertheless, we need to start pain management immediately with the ambition to restore function in every probable case of CRPS. An interdisciplinary setting with comprehensive approach (pharmacologic, interventional, and psychological in conjunction with rehabilitation pathway) has been proposed as protocol in the practical management of CRPS. It is crucial to have a high sensitivity value combined with a fair specificity in revising diagnostic criteria of CRPS. The validation and consensus for new rationalized diagnostic criteria of CRPS could facilitate further research to enhance clinical outcome including quality of life. These endeavors to minimize suffering from CRPS would certainly be appreciated by many patients and their loved ones.