Pain relief and associated factors: a cross-sectional observational web-based study in a Quebec cohort of persons living with chronic pain.

Objectives: Randomized clinical trials are used to evaluate the efficacy of various pain treatments individually, while a limited number of observational studies have portrayed the overall relief experienced by persons living with chronic pain. This study aimed to describe pain relief in real-world clinical settings and to identify associated factors. Methods: This exploratory web-based cross-sectional study used data from 1,419 persons recruited in the community. Overall pain relief brought by treatments used by participants was assessed using a 0%-100% scale (10-unit increments). Results: A total of 18.2% of participants reported minimal pain relief (0%-20%), 60.0% moderate to substantial pain relief (30%-60%), and 21.8% extensive pain relief (70%-100%). Multivariable multinomial regression analysis revealed factors significantly associated with greater pain relief, including reporting a stressful event as circumstances surrounding the onset of pain, living with pain for ≥10 years, milder pain intensity, less catastrophic thinking, use of prescribed pain medications, use of nonpharmacological pain treatments, access to a trusted healthcare professional, higher general health scores, and polypharmacy. Factors associated with lower pain relief included surgery as circumstances surrounding pain onset, use of over-the-counter pain medications, and severe psychological distress. Discussion: In this community sample of persons living with chronic pain, 8 out of 10 persons reported experiencing at least moderate relief with their treatment. The analysis has enabled us to explore potential modifiable factors as opportunities for improving the well-being of persons living with chronic pain.

Further development and validation of the Multimorbidity Treatment Burden Questionnaire (MTBQ).

OBJECTIVES: To undertake further psychometric testing of the Multimorbidity Treatment Burden Questionnaire (MTBQ) and examine whether reversing the scale reduced floor effects. DESIGN: Survey. SETTING: UK primary care. PARTICIPANTS: Adults (≥18 years) with three or more long-term conditions randomly selected from four general practices and invited by post. MEASURES: Baseline survey: sociodemographics, MTBQ (original or version with scale reversed), Treatment Burden Questionnaire (TBQ), four questions (from QQ-10) on ease of completing the questionnaires. Follow-up survey (1-4 weeks after baseline): MTBQ, TBQ and QQ-10. Anonymous data collected from electronic GP records: consultations (preceding 12 months) and long-term conditions. The proportion of missing data and distribution of responses were examined for the original and reversed versions of the MTBQ and the TBQ. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Spearman's rank correlation (Rs) assessed test-retest reliability and construct validity, respectively. Ease of completing the MTBQ and TBQ was compared. Interpretability was assessed by grouping global MTBQ scores into 0 and tertiles (>0). RESULTS: 244 adults completed the baseline survey (consent rate 31%, mean age 70 years) and 225 completed the follow-up survey. Reversing the scale did not reduce floor effects or data skewness. The global MTBQ scores had good test-retest reliability (ICC for agreement at baseline and follow-up 0.765, 95% CI 0.702 to 0.816). Global MTBQ score was correlated with global TBQ score (Rs 0.77, p<0.001), weakly correlated with number of consultations (Rs 0.17, p=0.010), and number of different general practitioners consulted (Rs 0.23, p<0.001), but not correlated with number of long-term conditions (Rs -0.063, p=0.330). Most participants agreed that both the MTBQ and TBQ were easy to complete and included aspects they were concerned about. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates test-retest reliability and ease of completion of the MTBQ and builds on a previous study demonstrating good content validity, construct validity and internal consistency reliability of the questionnaire.

New opioid prescription claims and their clinical indications: results from health administrative data in Quebec, Canada, over 14 years.

OBJECTIVES: Describe new opioid prescription claims, their clinical indications and annual trends among opioid naïve adults covered by the Quebec's public drug insurance plan (QPDIP) for the fiscal years 2006/2007-2019/2020. DESIGN AND SETTING: A retrospective observational study was conducted using data collected between 2006/2007 and 2019/2020 within the Quebec Integrated Chronic Disease Surveillance System, a linkage administrative data. PARTICIPANTS: A cohort of opioid naïve adults and new opioid users was created for each study year (median number=2 263 380 and 168 183, respectively, over study period). INTERVENTION: No. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE AND ANALYSES: A new opioid prescription was defined as the first opioid prescription claimed by an opioid naïve adult during a given fiscal year. The annual incidence proportion for each year was then calculated and standardised for age. A hierarchical algorithm was built to identify the most likely clinical indication for this prescription. Descriptive and trend analyses were performed. RESULTS: There was a 1.7% decrease of age-standardised annual incidence proportion during the study period, from 7.5% in 2006/2007 to 5.8% in 2019/2020. The decrease was highest after 2016/2017, reaching 5.5% annual percentage change. Median daily dose and days' supply decreased from 27 to 25 morphine milligram equivalent/day and from 5 to 4 days between 2006/2007 and 2019/2020, respectively. Between 2006/2007 and 2019/2020, these prescriptions' most likely clinical indications increased for cancer pain from 34% to 48%, for surgical pain from 31% to 36% and for dental pain from 9% to 11%. Inversely, the musculoskeletal pain decreased from 13% to 2%. There was good consistency between the clinical indications identified by the algorithm and prescriber's specialty or user's characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: New opioid prescription claims (incidence, dose and days' supply) decreased slightly over the last 14 years among QPDIP enrollees, especially after 2016/2017. Non-surgical and non-cancer pain became less common as their clinical indication.

Where we live matters: a comparison of chronic pain treatment between remote and non-remote regions of Quebec, Canada.

Objective: Where a person lives is a recognized socioeconomic determinant of health and influences healthcare access. This study aimed to compare the pain treatment profile of persons with chronic pain (CP) living in remote regions to those living in non-remote regions (near or in major urban centers). Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed among persons living with CP across Quebec. In a web-based questionnaire, participants were asked to report in which of the 17 administrative regions they were living (six considered "remote"). Pain treatment profile was drawn up using seven variables: use of prescribed pain medications, over-the-counter pain medications, non-pharmacological pain treatments, multimodal approach, access to a trusted healthcare professional for pain management, excessive polypharmacy (≥10 medications), and use of cannabis for pain. Results: 1,399 participants completed the questionnaire (women: 83.4%, mean age: 50 years, living in remote regions: 23.8%). As compared to persons living in remote regions, those living in non-remote regions were more likely to report using prescribed pain medications (83.8% vs. 67.4%), a multimodal approach (81.5% vs. 75.5%), experience excessive polypharmacy (28.1% vs. 19.1%), and report using cannabis for pain (33.1% vs. 20.7%) (bivariable p < 0.05). Only the use of prescribed medications as well as cannabis remained significantly associated with the region of residence in the multivariable models. Discussion: There are differences in treatment profiles of persons with CP depending on the region they live. Our results highlight the importance of considering remoteness, and not only rurality, when it comes to better understanding the determinants of pain management.

Relationship Between Diet Quality and Glucose-Lowering Medication Intensity Among Adults With Type 2 Diabetes: Results From the CARTaGENE Cohort.

Background: In real-world settings, whether diet and medication are used as complements for glycemic management in type 2 diabetes (T2D) remains unclear. This study assessed the relationship between diet quality and intensity of glucose-lowering medication among adults with T2D. Methods: This cross-sectional study included 352 adults with T2D from the CARTaGENE Québec population-based cohort. Diet quality was assessed using the Healthful Plant-Based Diet Index (hPDI). Glucose-lowering medication intensity was graded according to self-reported information on the type and number of drugs: no medication; oral monotherapy; oral polytherapy; and insulin with and without oral medication. In the subsample of 239 individuals who reported the medication dosages, intensity was also graded using the Medication Effect Score (MES). Results: In multivariable-adjusted models, we found no evidence of a relationship between the hPDI and medication intensity, assessed using the categorical approach (Pbetween-group = 0.25) or the MES (P = 0.43). However, the hPDI was inversely associated with the MES among men < 50 years of age and women < 60 years (ß1-point MES = -2.24 [95% confidence interval, -4.46, -0.02] hPDI points), but not among older individuals (ß = -0.03 [-1.28, 1.21] hPDI points). Evidence of a nonsignificant inverse relationship between the hPDI and HbA1c was observed (ß10-point hPDI = -0.23% [-0.63, 0.17]), whereas a positive and significant association between the MES and hemoglobin (Hb)A1c was found (ß1-point MES = 0.30% [0.10, 0.51]). Conclusions: In this cohort of adults with T2D, there was an overall lack of complementarity between diet quality and intensity of glucose-lowering medication. The issue was particularly important among younger adults for whom diet quality was inversely associated with intensity of medication.

Introduction: Il n'a jamais été étudié, en contexte réel, si la qualité de l'alimentation et la médication sont utilisées de façon complémentaire dans la gestion de la glycémie chez des personnes avec le diabète de type 2 (DT2). La présente a évalué la relation entre la qualité de l'alimentation et l'intensité de la médication hypoglycémiante chez des adultes avec DT2. Méthodes: Cette étude transversale portait sur 352 adultes avec DT2 participant à la cohorte populationnelle québécoise CARTaGENE. Nous avons évalué la qualité du régime à l'aide du Healthful Plant-based Diet Index (hPDI, soit l'indice d'un régime alimentaire à base de plantes). Nous avons évalué l'intensité des médicaments hypoglycémiants à partir des renseignements fournis sur le type et le nombre de médicaments : aucun médicament, monothérapie orale, polythérapie orale, insuline avec ou sans médicaments par voie orale. Dans le sous-échantillon de 239 individus qui ont mentionné les posologies de médicaments, nous avons aussi évalué l'intensité au moyen du Medication Effect Score (MES). Résultats: Dans les modèles multivariés, nous n'avons observé aucune évidence de relation entre le hPDI et l'intensité des médicaments au moyen de l'approche catégorielle (Pentre les groupes = 0,25) ou du MES (P = 0,43). Toutefois, le hPDI était inversement associé au MES chez les hommes < 50 ans et chez les femmes < 60 ans (ßMES 1 point = ­2,24 [intervalle de confiance à 95 %, ­4,46, ­0,02] points hPDI), mais non chez les personnes plus âgées (ß = ­0,03 [­1,28, 1,21] point hPDI). Nous avons observé une relation inverse non significative entre le hPDI et l'hémoglobine (Hb)A1c (ßhPDI 10 points = ­0,23 % [­0,63, 0,17]) et une association positive et significative entre le MES et l'HbA1c (ßMES 1 point = 0,30 % [0,10, 0,51]). Conclusions: Au sein de cette cohorte d'adultes avec DT2, nous avons constaté une absence globale de complémentarité entre la qualité de l'alimentation et l'intensité des médicaments hypoglycémiants. Cet enjeu était d'autant plus important chez les personnes plus jeunes pour lesquels la qualité du régime était inversement associée à l'intensité des médicaments.

Changing society, changing research: integrating gender to better understand physical and psychological treatments use in chronic pain management.

ABSTRACT: Treatment of chronic pain should be multimodal and include pharmacological, physical, and psychological treatments. However, because various barriers to physical and psychological treatments (PPTs) exist, a better understanding of biopsychosocial factors leading to their use is relevant. This study aimed to explore the association between gender identity, gender-stereotyped personality traits, and the use of PPTs in chronic pain management. The ChrOnic Pain trEatment cohort, a self-reported data infrastructure resulting from a web-based recruitment of 1935 people living with chronic pain (Quebec, Canada) was analyzed. Gender identity was operationalized as women, men, and nonbinary. Gender-stereotyped personality traits were measured using the Bem Sex-Role Inventory (feminine, masculine, androgynous, undifferentiated). A checklist of 31 types of PPTs that can be used for chronic pain management was presented to participants (yes/no). From the 1433 participants, 85.5% reported using at least one PPT. Hot-cold therapies (43.4%), exercise (41.9%), and meditation (35.2%) were the most frequently used PPTs, but most popular PPTs were not the same among women and men. Women reported a significantly higher use of PPTs in general (87.2% vs 77.2%; P < 0.001). Multivariable and interaction analyses showed that identifying as a man decreased the odds of reporting the use of PPTs (odds ratio: 0.32, 95% confidence interval: 0.11-0.92) but only among participants who scored high on both masculine and feminine personality traits (those classified as androgynous). The high prevalence of PPTs use found in our study is positive. Our results are relevant for a more personalized promotion of PPTs for chronic pain management.

The Medication Quantification Scale 4.0: An Updated Index Based on Prescribers' Perceptions of the Risk Associated With Chronic Pain Medications.

To quantify risks associated with drug utilization in the real world for the treatment of chronic pain (CP), an index called the Medication Quantification Scale (MQS) was developed in 1992 in the United States and last updated in 2003. This study aimed to update, adapt to the contemporary Canadian context, and validate a revised version of the MQS (the MQS-4.0). Step 1: An expert committee adapted the MQS to the Canadian clinical practice context. Step 2: An update of risk weights given to medication subclasses was achieved using a prescriber survey (weights were derived from median 0-10 scores given to each subclass). Step 3: Construct validity of the MQS-4.0 was assessed after applying risk weights to the medication use profile of persons living with CP covered by public drug insurance plan. Thirty-six medication subclasses were included in the MQS-4.0. A total of 207 prescribers (physicians, pharmacists, and nurse practitioners) participated in the perception survey; 10.63% identified as pain specialists. When risk weights were applied to prescription claims (n = 9,122), the MQS-4.0 score was associated (P < .05) with the MQS-III score and variables associated with polypharmacy (eg, Charlson Comorbidity Index, number of prescribers or health care visits). This study provides an updated index intended for adult populations based on prescribers' perceptions of the risk associated with CP medications that can be useful for clinical practice and research among persons living with CP in Canada. It will, however, be relevant to verify whether similar risk weights are obtained in future pain specialist surveys. PERSPECTIVE: The MQS-4.0 is an update of the MQS used for quantifying the risk associated with the use of analgesics/coanalgesics. Adequate psychometrics properties were found.

Health care system costs related to potentially inappropriate medication use involving opioids in older adults in Canada.

BACKGROUND: Older adults are at risk of potentially inappropriate medication use given polypharmacy, multimorbidity, and age-related changes, which contribute to the growing burden associated with opioid use. The objective of this study was to estimate the costs of health service utilization attributable to opioid use and potentially inappropriate medication use involving opioids in older adults in a public health care system. METHODS: The sample included 1201 older adults consulting in primary care, covered by the public drug plan, without a cancer diagnosis and opioid use in the year before interview. Secondary analyses were conducted using two data sources: health survey and provincial administrative data. Health system costs included inpatient and outpatient visits, physician billing, and medication costs. Unit costs were calculated using annual financial and activity reports from 2013-2014, adjusted to 2022 Canadian dollars. Opioid use and potentially inappropriate medication use involving opioids were identified over 3 years. Generalized linear models with gamma distribution were employed to model 3-year costs associated with opioid use and potentially inappropriate medication use involving opioids. A phase-based approach was implemented to provide descriptive results on the costs associated with each phase: i) no use, ii) opioid use, and iii) potentially inappropriate medication use involving opioids. RESULTS: Opioid use and potentially inappropriate medication use involving opioids were associated with adjusted 3-year costs of $2,222 (95% CI: $1,179-$3,264) and $8,987 (95% CI: $7,370-$10,605), respectively, compared to no use. In phase-based analyses, costs were the highest during inappropriate use. CONCLUSIONS: Potentially inappropriate medication use involving opioids is associated with higher costs compared to those observed with opioid use and no use. There is a need for more effective use of health care resources to reduce costs for the health care system.

Experiences and Perceptions of Medical Cannabis among People Living with Chronic Pain and Community Pharmacists: A Qualitative Study in Canada.

Background: The use of cannabis to treat chronic pain is under debate despite high expectations from patients. Qualitative data obtained by exploring both patients' and health professionals' perspectives are scarce. Aims: This study aimed to understand the experiences and perceptions of people living with chronic pain and community pharmacists regarding the role of cannabis in chronic pain treatment in the Canadian context where both medical and recreational cannabis are legal. Methods: We conducted 12 online focus groups (July 2020-February 2021) with 26 patients and 19 community pharmacists using semistructured discussion guides. All discussions were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim were analyzed using a reflexive thematic approach. Results: We developed three themes related to patients' perspectives and three themes related to pharmacists' perspectives. Patients' perspectives included (1) cannabis as an alternative to other pain medications, (2) a new treatment with potential health-related risks, and (3) a therapy rather than a recreational drug. Pharmacists' perspectives included (1) challenges in monitoring drug interactions with cannabis in the context of scarce research data, (2) informing and treating patients self-medicating with cannabis amid its growing popularity, and (3) financial costs and legal constraints for patients. Conclusions: This study highlights patients' and pharmacists' urgent need for reliable information regarding the benefits and risks of cannabis. Training tailored to pharmacists' needs and evidence-based information for patients should be developed to support pharmacists' practice, improve patients' experiences, and promote safe cannabis use.

Contexte: L'utilisation du cannabis pour traiter la douleur chronique fait l'objet d'un débat, malgré les fortes attentes des patients. Les données qualitatives issues de l'exploration des perspectives à la fois des patients et des professionnels de la santé, demeurent rares.Objectifs: Cette étude visait à comprendre les expériences et les perceptions des personnes vivant avec une douleur chronique et des pharmaciens communautaires concernant le rôle du cannabis dans le traitement de la douleur chronique dans le contexte canadien, où le cannabis médical et récréatif est légal.Méthodes: Nous avons mené 12 groupes de discussion en ligne entre juillet 2020 et février 2021, réunissant 26 patients et 19 pharmaciens communautaires, à l'aide de guides de discussion semi-structurés. Toutes les discussions ont été enregistrées et transcrites mot à mot, puis analysées à l'aide d'une approche thématique réflexive.Résultats: Nous avons développé trois thèmes liés aux perspectives des patients et trois thèmes liés aux perspectives des pharmaciens. Le point de vue des patients incluait (1) le cannabis comme option de rechange à d'autres médicaments contre la douleur, (2) un nouveau traitement avec des risques potentiels pour la santé, et (3) un traitement plutôt qu'une drogue récréative. Le point de vue des pharmaciens portait sur (1) les défis liés à la surveillance des interactions médicamenteuses avec le cannabis dans le contexte de la rareté des données de recherche, (2) l'information et le traitement des patients qui s'auto-médicamentent avec du cannabis dans un contexte de popularité croissante, et (3) les coûts financiers et les contraintes légales pour les patients.Conclusions: Cette étude met en évidence le besoin urgent des patients et des pharmaciens de disposer d'informations fiables sur les avantages et les risques du cannabis. Une formation adaptée aux besoins des pharmaciens et des informations fondées sur des données probantes pour les patients devraient être développées pour soutenir la pratique des pharmaciens, améliorer l'expérience des patients et promouvoir une utilisation sûre du cannabis.

Pain Medications Used by Persons Living With Fibromyalgia: A Comparison Between the Profile of a Quebec Sample and Clinical Practice Guidelines.

Background: Pharmacological management of fibromyalgia is complex. Chronic pain management is characterized by off-label prescribing and use, multimorbidity, and polypharmacy. Aims: This study aimed to describe pain medications use and perceived risk among people living with fibromyalgia and compare this use to evidence-based recommendations. Methods: Directive telephone interviews were conducted with 63 individuals self-reporting a diagnosis of fibromyalgia (Quebec, Canada). The questionnaire addressed specific questions about their pain and pharmacological treatments currently used for pain management (prescribed and over-the-counter). Collected data were compared to the Canadian Fibromyalgia Clinical Practice Guidelines and to evidence reports published by recognized organizations. Results: Despite a lack of robust scientific evidence to support opioids use to manage pain in fibromyalgia, 33% of our sample reported using them. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were used by 54.0% of participants, although this medication is not recommended due to lack of efficacy. Tramadol, which is recommended, was used by 23.8% of participants. Among the medications strongly recommended, anticonvulsants were used by 36.5%, serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor antidepressants by 55.6%, and tricyclic antidepressants by 22.2%. Cannabinoids (17.5%) and medical cannabis (34.9%) use were also reported. For all of these medication subclasses, no differences were found between participants not reporting (n = 35) or reporting (n = 28) more than one pain diagnosis (P < 0.05). Medication subclasses considered most at risk of adverse effects by participants were the least used. Conclusions: Results reveal discordance between evidence-based recommendations and medications use, which highlights the complexity of pharmacological treatment of fibromyalgia.

Contexte: La prise en charge pharmacologique de la fibromyalgie est complexe. La prise en charge de la douleur chronique est caractérisée par la prescription et l'utilisation non conforme de médicaments, la multimorbidité et la polypharmacothérapie.Objectifs: Cette étude visait à décrire l'utilisation de médicaments contre la douleur et le risque perçu chez les personnes atteintes de fibromyalgie, et à comparer cette utilisation aux recommandations fondées sur des données probantes.Méthodes: Des entretiens téléphoniques directifs ont été menés auprès de 63 personnes ayant déclaré avoir reçu un diagnostic de fibromyalgie (Québec, Canada). Le questionnaire abordait des questions précises sur leur douleur et les traitements pharmacologiques actuellement utilisés pour la prise en charge de leur douleur (prescrits et vendus sans ordonnance). Les données recueillies ont été comparées aux Lignes directrices canadiennes sur la fibromyalgie et aux rapports de données probantes publiés par des organisations reconnues.Résultats: Malgré l'absence de données probantes robustes à l'appui de l'utilisation des opioïdes pour la prise en charge la douleur chez les personnes atteintes de fibromyalgie, 33 % de notre échantillon a déclaré les utiliser. Les anti-inflammatoires nonstéroïdiens étaient pour leur part utilisés par 54,0 % des participants, bien que ce médicament ne soit pas recommandé en raison d'un manque d'efficacité. Le tramadol, recommandé, était utilisé par 23,8 % des participants. Parmi les médicaments fortement recommandés, les anticonvulsivants étaient utilisés par 36,5 % desparticipants, les antidépresseurs inhibiteurs de la recapture de la sérotonine et de la noradrénaline par 55,6 % des participants, et les antidépresseurs tricycliques par 22,2 % d'entre eux. La consommation de cannabinoïdes (17,5 %) et de cannabis médical (34,9 %) ont également été signalées. Pour toutes ces sous-classes de médicaments, aucune différence n'a été trouvée entre les participants ne signalant pas (n = 35) ou signalant (n = 28) plus d'un diagnostic de douleur (P < 0,05). Les sous-classes de médicaments considérées par les participants comme les plus à risque d'effets indésirables étaient les moins utilisées.Conclusions: Les résultats révèlent une discordance entre les recommandations fondées sur des données probantes et l'utilisation de médicaments, ce qui met en évidence la complexité du traitement pharmacologique de la fibromyalgie.

Polypharmacy and Excessive Polypharmacy Among Persons Living with Chronic Pain: A Cross-Sectional Study on the Prevalence and Associated Factors.

Purpose: Polypharmacy can be defined as the concomitant use of ≥5 medications and excessive polypharmacy, as the use of ≥10 medications. Objectives were to (1) assess the prevalence of polypharmacy and excessive polypharmacy among persons living with chronic pain, and (2) identify sociodemographic and clinical factors associated with excessive polypharmacy. Patients and Methods: This cross-sectional study used data from 1342 persons from the ChrOnic Pain trEatment (COPE) Cohort (Quebec, Canada). The self-reported number of medications currently used by participants (regardless of whether they were prescribed or taken over-the-counter, or were used for treating pain or other health issues) was categorized to assess polypharmacy and excessive polypharmacy. Results: Participants reported using an average of 6 medications (median: 5). The prevalence of polypharmacy was 71.4% (95% CI: 69.0-73.8) and excessive polypharmacy was 25.9% (95% CI: 23.6-28.3). No significant differences were found across gender identity groups. Multivariable logistic regression revealed that factors associated with greater chances of reporting excessive polypharmacy (vs <10 medications) included being born in Canada, using prescribed pain medications, and reporting greater pain intensity (0-10) or pain relief from currently used pain treatments (0-100%). Factors associated with lower chances of excessive polypharmacy were using physical and psychological pain treatments, reporting better general health/physical functioning, considering pain to be terrible/feeling like it will never get better, and being employed. Conclusion: Polypharmacy is the rule rather than the exception among persons living with chronic pain. Close monitoring and evaluation of the different medications used are important for all persons, especially those with limited access to care.

Trends in Prescription Chronic Pain Medication Use before and during the First Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Québec, Canada: An Interrupted Time Series Analysis.

BACKGROUND: In Canada, a state of health emergency was declared in May 2020 as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to assess trends in the use of prescription medication for pain management by people living with chronic pain before and during the first wave of the pandemic. METHODS: Participants (n = 177) were adults reporting chronic pain who had completed a web-based questionnaire in 2019 and for whom complete longitudinal private and public insurance prescription claims were available. The monthly prevalence of medication use for nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), opioids, and prescribed cannabinoids was assessed. An interrupted time series analysis was then performed to evaluate if the COVID-19 pandemic had had an impact on trends in pain medication use. RESULTS: The beginning of the first wave of the pandemic was associated with the onset of a downward trend in opioid use (p < 0.05); no such association was found regarding NSAIDs. However, point prevalence of opioid use at the beginning (Nov. 2019) and at the end (Mai 2020) of the study period remained somewhat stable (17.0% vs. 16.4%). Regarding prescribed cannabinoids, a gradual increase in use was observed over the entire study period independently from the impact of the first wave of the pandemic (15.3% vs. 22.6%, p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: While the occurrence of the first wave did have an impact on opioid use among people living with chronic pain, access to and use of opioids appear to have returned to normal before the end of the first wave of COVID-19.

Educational needs and preferences of adult patients with acute or chronic pain: a mixed methods systematic review protocol.

OBJECTIVES: This review will aim to synthesize the available quantitative and qualitative evidence on the educational needs and preferences of adult patients with acute or chronic pain. INTRODUCTION: Acute and chronic pain are prevalent problems and are associated with significant individual and societal consequences. Education is a critical component of pain management. However, the impact of educational interventions on pain outcomes remains limited. The lack of patient input--what patients want to know and how they want to be informed--is one of the main issues underlying intervention design. INCLUSION CRITERIA: We will include qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods studies describing the educational needs and preferences of adult patients with acute or chronic pain. METHODS: This review will follow the JBI guidelines for mixed methods systematic reviews. We will search MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Web of Science, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. The search strategy will commence from the year 1990 onward and there will be no language restrictions. The retrieved titles, abstracts, and full-text reports will be screened by pairs of independent reviewers. These pairs of reviewers will also independently extract data using the JBI tools for mixed methods systematic reviews. Methodological quality will be assessed using the mixed methods appraisal tool. A convergent integrated approach to synthesis and integration of the quantitative and qualitative data will be used. REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42022303834.

Are Lipid-Lowering and Antihypertensive Medications Used as Complements to Heart-Healthy Diets? A Scoping Review.

In cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention, whether antihypertensive and lipid-lowering medications are used as complements to heart-healthy diets has not been thoroughly assessed. This scoping review aimed to 1) analyze observational studies that assessed the relationship between diet and antihypertensive/lipid-lowering medication use and 2) evaluate whether medication was used as a complement to heart-healthy dietary intakes. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and CINAHL through 14 January, 2023, for studies that assessed either 1) intraindividual changes in diet associated with lipid-lowering/antihypertensive medication initiation or use or 2) interindividual differences in diet between users and nonusers of these medications. A total of 17 studies were included. Of those, 3 prospectively assessed the intraindividual changes in diet associated with medication initiation or use, but none documented potential changes in diet prior to medication initiation. The 14 other studies compared dietary intakes of medication users and nonusers, most of which also relied on an incomplete assessment of the temporal dynamics between diet and medication use as they employed cross-sectional (n = 12) or repeated cross-sectional (n = 2) designs. Data from 8 studies, including 4 of the 5 studies from Europe, suggested that medication was used as a complement to heart-healthy diets, whereas data from the 9 other studies, including the 4 conducted in the United States, provided no such evidence, indicating potential between-country differences in this relationship. Finally, no studies investigated how the dynamics between diet and medication use influenced the long-term CVD risk. This scoping review suggests that the current literature on the relationship between lipid-lowering/antihypertensive medication use and diet provides an incomplete perspective on how medication may influence diet in CVD prevention. Prospective studies assessing intraindividual changes in diet associated with medication initiation and use and how these dynamics influence the CVD risk are thus needed.

Changes in self-rated physical and mental health and life satisfaction associated with opioid and potentially inappropriate opioid prescribing in primary care older adults.

OBJECTIVE: To examine changes in life satisfaction and physical and mental health associated with opioid and potentially inappropriate opioid prescribing (PIOP) among older adults. METHODS: Secondary data analysis from the Étude sur la Santé des Aînés (ESA)-Services study. The sample consisted of 945 older adults recruited in primary care with available health survey information linked to administrative medical record data. The exposure of interest was categorized as no prescription, opioid prescription, and PIOP, defined using the Beers criteria. Outcomes were self-rated physical health, mental health, and life satisfaction measured at baseline and at a 3-year follow-up. Generalized estimating equations were used to examine 3-year changes in outcomes as a function of opioid prescribing. Analyses were adjusted for covariates relating to health, psychosocial, and sociodemographic factors as well as duration/frequency of opioid prescribing. Analyses were conducted in the overall sample and in non-cancer patients. RESULTS: The sample had an average age of 73.1 years; the majority was Canadian-born (96.3%) while females made up over half (55.4%) the sample. Compared to not receiving an opioid prescription, PIOP was associated with a deterioration in physical health (ORadjusted = 0.65; 95%CI = 0.49, 0.86), but not mental health and life satisfaction. In non-cancer patients, PIOP was associated with poorer physical health (ORadjusted = 0.59; 95%CI = 0.40, 0.87) and opioid prescribing was marginally associated with improved life satisfaction (ORadjusted = 1.58; 95%CI = 0.96, 2.60). CONCLUSION: PIOP was associated with a deterioration in physical health. Patient-centred chronic pain management and the effect on health and well-being require further study in older adults.

Multimorbidity Treatment Burden Questionnaire (MTBQ): Translation, Cultural Adaptation, and Validation in French-Canadian.

Reliable treatment burden measures are needed given the aging population and the associated increase in multimorbidity and polypharmacy. Treatment burden is defined as the effort to care for one's health and the resulting impact on one's daily life. This study aimed to translate the Multimorbidity Treatment Burden Questionnaire (MTBQ) for French-Canadians and assess its reliability and validity. The MTBQ was translated and tested with cognitive debriefing interviews, and the French version (MTBQ-F) was then administered 2 times among 105 participants. Reliability and validity were examined using the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), Cronbach's alpha, and Spearman's correlations. The median global MTBQ-F scores were 32.69 (interquartile range [IQR]: 21.15-48.08) and 30.77 (IQR: 21.15-46.15) for the first and second administrations, respectively. Test-retest (ICC: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.63-0.81) and internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha: 0.80) were good. There was a moderate positive correlation between the MTBQ-F score and the number of self-reported conditions (rho: 0.28). This valid instrument could identify patients experiencing a high treatment burden and assess the impact of interventions among them.

Community pharmacists' expanding roles in supporting patients before and during COVID-19: An exploratory qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Timely access and attachment to a primary healthcare provider is associated with better population health outcomes. In Canada, community pharmacists are highly accessible and patients struggling to access a family physician or nurse practitioner (i.e., "unattached") may seek care from a community pharmacist. Community pharmacists took on additional roles during the COVID-19 pandemic; however, little is known about how community pharmacists managed the needs of attached and unattached patients before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. AIM: To describe Nova Scotian community pharmacists' roles in caring for unattached patients before and during the COVID-19 pandemic and identifying barriers and facilitators to optimizing patient access. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews with community pharmacists (n = 11) across the province of Nova Scotia (Canada) were conducted. RESULTS: Five key themes were noted: (1) rising pressure on pharmacists to meet unique health needs of attached and unattached patients; (2) what pharmacists have to offer (e.g., accessibility, trustworthiness); (3) positioning pharmacists in the system (e.g., how pharmacists can address gaps in primary healthcare); (4) pharmacist wellbeing; and, (5) recommendations for practice post-pandemic (e.g., maintain some policy changes made during the COVID-19 pandemic). CONCLUSION: Before and during the pandemic, community pharmacists played a significant and increasing role providing care to patients, especially unattached patients. With growing numbers of unattached patients, it is vital that community pharmacists are supported to provide services to care for the health needs of patients.

Strategies to prevent long-term opioid use following trauma: a Canadian practice survey.

PURPOSE: To evaluate how Canadian clinicians involved in trauma patient care and prescribing opioids perceive the use and effectiveness of strategies to prevent long-term opioid therapy following trauma. Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of these strategies were also assessed. METHODS: We conducted a web-based cross-sectional survey. Potential participants were identified by trauma program managers and directors of the targeted departments in three Canadian provinces. We designed our questionnaire using standard health survey research methods. The questionnaire was administered between April 2021 and November 2021. RESULTS: Our response rate was 47% (350/744), and 52% (181/350) of participants completed the entire survey. Most respondents (71%, 129/181) worked in teaching hospitals. Multimodal analgesia (93%, 240/257), nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents (77%, 198/257), and physical stimulation (75%, 193/257) were the strategies perceived to be the most frequently used. Several preventive strategies were perceived to be very effective by over 80% of respondents. Of these, some that were reported as not being frequently used were perceived to be among the most effective ones, including guidelines or protocols, assessing risk factors for opioid misuse, physical health follow-up by a professional, training for clinicians, patient education, and prescription monitoring systems. Staff shortages, time constraints, and organizational practices were identified as the main barriers to the implementation of the highest ranked preventive strategies. CONCLUSIONS: Several strategies to prevent long-term opioid therapy following trauma are perceived as being effective by those prescribing opioids in this population. Some of these strategies appear to be commonly used in everyday practice and others less so. Future research should focus on which preventive strategies should be given higher priority for implementation before assessing their effectiveness.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Évaluer comment les cliniciens canadiens impliqués dans les soins aux patients traumatisés et prescrivant des opioïdes perçoivent l'utilisation et l'efficacité des stratégies visant à prévenir le traitement prolongé par opioïde après un traumatisme. Les obstacles et facilitateurs de la mise en œuvre de ces stratégies ont aussi été analysés. MéTHODES: Nous avons réalisé une enquête transversale via le Web. Les participants potentiels ont été identifiés par les gestionnaires et directeurs de programmes de traumatologie des départements ciblés dans trois provinces canadiennes. Nous avons conçu notre questionnaire en utilisant la méthodologie de recherche usuelle des enquêtes de santé. Le questionnaire a été administré entre avril 2021 et novembre 2021. RéSULTATS: Notre taux de réponse a été de 47 % (350/744) et 52 % (181/350) des participants ont complété l'enquête dans sa totalité. La majorité des personnes interrogées (71 %, 129/181) travaillait dans des hôpitaux universitaires. L'analgésie multimodale (93 %, 240/257), les anti-inflammatoires non stéroïdiens (77 %, 198/257) et la stimulation physique (75 %, 193/257) étaient les stratégies perçues comme étant le plus fréquemment utilisées. Plusieurs stratégies préventives étaient perçues comme étant très efficaces par plus de 80 % des répondants. Parmi celles-ci, certaines étaient signalées comme n'étant pas utilisées très souvent, mais perçues comme étant les plus efficaces, notamment les lignes directrices et protocoles évaluant les facteurs de risque d'utilisation abusive des opioïdes, le suivi de la santé physique par un professionnel, la formation des cliniciens, l'éducation des patients et les systèmes de suivi des prescriptions. La pénurie de personnels, les contraintes de temps et les pratiques de l'établissement ont été identifiées comme étant les principaux obstacles à la mise en place des stratégies préventives classées parmi les premières. CONCLUSIONS: Plusieurs stratégies de prévention du traitement par opioïdes à long terme après un traumatisme sont perçues comme efficaces par ceux qui les prescrivent à cette population de patients. Certaines de ces stratégies apparaissent comme couramment utilisées dans la pratique quotidienne et d'autres moins souvent. La recherche future devrait se concentrer sur la détermination des stratégies préventives auxquelles il faudrait accorder la plus grande priorité de mise en œuvre avant d'évaluer leur efficacité.

Reorganizing Pharmaceutical Care in Family Medicine Groups for Older Adults With or at Risk of Major Neurocognitive Disorders: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: The latest global figures show that 55 million persons lived with major neurocognitive disorders (MNCDs) worldwide in 2021. In Quebec, Canada, most of these older adults are cared for by family physicians in interdisciplinary primary care clinics such as family medicine groups (FMG). When a person has a MNCD, taking potentially inappropriate medications or polypharmacy (5 different medications or more) increases their vulnerability to serious adverse events. With the recent arrival of pharmacists working in FMGs and their expanded scope of practice and autonomy, new possibilities for optimizing older adults' pharmacotherapy are opening. OBJECTIVE: This project aims to evaluate the impact of involving these pharmacists in the care trajectory of older adults living with MNCD, in an interdisciplinary collaboration with the FMG team, as well as home care nurses and physicians. Pharmacists will provide medication reviews, interventions, and recommendations to improve the pharmacotherapy and support offered to these patients and their caregivers. METHODS: This 2-step mixed methods study will include a quasi-experimental controlled trial (step 1) and semistructured interviews (step 2). Older adults undergoing cognitive assessment, recently diagnosed with MNCD, or receiving care for this at home will be identified and recruited in FMGs in 2 Quebec regions. FMGs implementing the intervention will involve pharmacists in these patients' care trajectory. Training and regular mentoring will be offered to these FMGs, especially to pharmacists. In control FMGs, no FMG pharmacist will be involved with these patients, and usual care will be provided. RESULTS: Medication use (including appropriateness) and burden, satisfaction of care received, and quality of life will be assessed at study beginning and after 6 months of follow-up and compared between groups. At the end of the intervention study, we will conduct semistructured interviews with FMG care team members (pharmacists, nurses, and physicians) who have experienced the intervention. We will ask about the feasibility of integrating the intervention into practice and their satisfaction with and their perception of the intervention's impacts for older adults and their families. We will assess the effect of improved pharmaceutical care for older adults with or at risk of MNCDs through the involvement of FMG pharmacists and a reorganization of pharmaceutical care. CONCLUSIONS: The inclusion of pharmacists in interdisciplinary care teams is recent and rising, strengthened by more substantial pharmacist practice roles. Results will inform the processes required to successfully involve pharmacists and implement developed tools and procedures transposable to other care settings to improve patient care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04889794; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04889794. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/42577.