Reducing Opioid Use for Chronic Pain With a Group-Based Intervention: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Opioid use for chronic nonmalignant pain can be harmful. Objective: To test whether a multicomponent, group-based, self-management intervention reduced opioid use and improved pain-related disability compared with usual care. Design, Setting, and Participants: Multicentered, randomized clinical trial of 608 adults taking strong opioids (buprenorphine, dipipanone, morphine, diamorphine, fentanyl, hydromorphone, methadone, oxycodone, papaveretum, pentazocine, pethidine, tapentadol, and tramadol) to treat chronic nonmalignant pain. The study was conducted in 191 primary care centers in England between May 17, 2017, and January 30, 2019. Final follow-up occurred March 18, 2020. Intervention: Participants were randomized 1:1 to either usual care or 3-day-long group sessions that emphasized skill-based learning and education, supplemented by 1-on-1 support delivered by a nurse and lay person for 12 months. Main Outcomes and Measures: The 2 primary outcomes were Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Pain Interference Short Form 8a (PROMIS-PI-SF-8a) score (T-score range, 40.7-77; 77 indicates worst pain interference; minimal clinically important difference, 3.5) and the proportion of participants who discontinued opioids at 12 months, measured by self-report. Results: Of 608 participants randomized (mean age, 61 years; 362 female [60%]; median daily morphine equivalent dose, 46 mg [IQR, 25 to 79]), 440 (72%) completed 12-month follow-up. There was no statistically significant difference in PROMIS-PI-SF-8a scores between the 2 groups at 12-month follow-up (-4.1 in the intervention and -3.17 in the usual care groups; between-group difference: mean difference, -0.52 [95% CI, -1.94 to 0.89]; P = .15). At 12 months, opioid discontinuation occurred in 65 of 225 participants (29%) in the intervention group and 15 of 208 participants (7%) in the usual care group (odds ratio, 5.55 [95% CI, 2.80 to 10.99]; absolute difference, 21.7% [95% CI, 14.8% to 28.6%]; P < .001). Serious adverse events occurred in 8% (25/305) of the participants in the intervention group and 5% (16/303) of the participants in the usual care group. The most common serious adverse events were gastrointestinal (2% in the intervention group and 0% in the usual care group) and locomotor/musculoskeletal (2% in the intervention group and 1% in the usual care group). Four people (1%) in the intervention group received additional medical care for possible or probable symptoms of opioid withdrawal (shortness of breath, hot flushes, fever and pain, small intestinal bleed, and an overdose suicide attempt). Conclusions and Relevance: In people with chronic pain due to nonmalignant causes, compared with usual care, a group-based educational intervention that included group and individual support and skill-based learning significantly reduced patient-reported use of opioids, but had no effect on perceived pain interference with daily life activities. Trial Registration: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN49470934.

Communicating biopsy results from breast screening assessment: current practice in English breast screening centres and staff perspectives of telephoning results.

OBJECTIVE: To record how breast screening centres in England deliver all biopsy results (cancer/non-cancer) from the breast assessment visit. DESIGN: Online survey of 63 of 79 breast screening centres in England from all regions (East Midlands, East of England, London, North East Yorkshire & Humber, North West, South East, South West, West Midlands). The survey contained quantitative measures of frequency for telephoning biopsy results (routinely, occasionally or never) and optional qualitative free-text responses. Surveys were completed by a staff member from each centre. RESULTS: There were no regional trends in the use of telephone results services, (X² (14, n=63)=11.55, p=0.64), Centres who telephoned results routinely did not deliver results sooner than centres who deliver results in-person (X² (16, n=63)=12.76, p=0.69).When delivering cancer results, 76.2% of centres never telephone results and 23.8% of centres occasionally telephone results. No centres reported delivering cancer results routinely by telephone. Qualitative content analysis suggests that cancer results are only telephoned at the patient request and under exceptional circumstances.When delivering non-cancer results, 12.7% of centres never telephoned results, 38.1% occasionally telephoned results and 49.2% routinely telephoned results. Qualitative content analysis revealed different processes for delivering telephone results, including patient choice and scheduling an in-person results appointment for all women attending breast assessment, then ringing non-cancer results unexpectedly ahead of this prebooked appointment. CONCLUSIONS: In the National Health Service Breast Screening Programme, breast assessment results that are cancer are routinely delivered in-person. However, non-cancer breast assessment results are often routinely delivered by telephone, despite breast screening policy recommendations. More research is needed to understand the impact of telephoning results on women attending breast assessment, particularly women who receive a non-cancer result. Future research should also consider how women themselves might prefer to receive their results.

Process evaluation protocol for the I-WOTCH study: an opioid tapering support programme for people with chronic non-malignant pain.

INTRODUCTION: The Improving the Wellbeing of people with Opioid Treated CHronic Pain (I-WOTCH) randomised controlled trial uses a multicomponent self-management intervention to help people taper their opioid use. This approach is not widely used and its efficacy is unknown. A process evaluation alongside the trial will help to assess how the intervention was delivered, looking at the dose of intervention received and the fidelity of the delivery. We will explore how the intervention may have brought about change through the experiences of the participants receiving and the staff delivering the intervention and whether there were contextual factors involved. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A mixed methods process evaluation will assess how the processes of the I-WOTCH intervention fared and whether these affected the outcomes. We will collect quantitative data, for example, group attendance analysed with statistical methods. Qualitative data, for example, from interviews and feedback forms will be analysed using framework analysis. We will use a 'following a thread' and a mixed methods matrix for the final integrated analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The I-WOTCH trial and process evaluation were granted full ethics approval by Yorkshire and The Humber-South Yorkshire Research Ethics Committee on 13 September 2016 (16/YH/0325). All data were collected in accordance with data protection guidelines. Participants provided written informed consent for the main trial, and all interviewees provided additional written informed consent. The results of the process evaluation will be published and presented at conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN49470934; Pre-results.

Testing a support programme for opioid reduction for people with chronic non-malignant pain: the I-WOTCH randomised controlled trial protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic non-malignant pain has a major impact on the well-being, mood and productivity of those affected. Opioids are increasingly prescribed to manage this type of pain, but with a risk of other disabling symptoms, when their effectiveness has been questioned. This trial is designed to implement and evaluate a patient-centred intervention targeting withdrawal of strong opioids in people with chronic pain. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled trial will assess the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a group-based multicomponent intervention combined with individualised clinical facilitator led support for the management of chronic non-malignant pain against the control intervention (self-help booklet and relaxation compact disc). An embedded process evaluation will examine fidelity of delivery and investigate experiences of the intervention. The two primary outcomes are activities of daily living (measured by Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Pain Interference Short Form (8A)) and opioid use. The secondary outcomes are pain severity, quality of life, sleep quality, self-efficacy, adverse events and National Health Service (NHS) healthcare resource use. Participants are followed up at 4, 8 and 12 months, with a primary endpoint of 12 months. Between-group differences will indicate effectiveness; we are looking for a difference of 3.5 points on our pain interference outcome (scale 40 to 77). We will undertake an NHS perspective cost-effectiveness analysis using quality adjusted life years. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Full approval was given by Yorkshire & The Humber - South Yorkshire Research Ethics Committee on 13 September, 2016 (16/YH/0325). Appropriate local approvals were sought for each area in which recruitment was undertaken. The current protocol version is 1.6 date 19 December 2018. Publication of results in peer- reviewed journals will inform the scientific and clinical community. We will disseminate results to patient participants and study facilitators in a study newsletter as well as a lay summary of results on the study website. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN49470934; Pre-results.

The effect of opioid therapy on sleep quality in patients with chronic non-malignant pain: A systematic review and exploratory meta-analysis.

Current guidelines recommend opioid therapy to chronic non-malignant pain (CNP) patients when the benefits for pain and function outweigh risks. This systematic review examined the effects of opioid therapy on sleep - a valued functional outcome- in CNP. Electronic and hand searches of relevant studies up through July 2017 identified 18 eligible studies providing data from 3,746 CNP patients for analysis. Twelve of these studies were randomised controlled trials of up to 12-month in duration. Morphine sulfate, oxycodone and transdermal fentanyl were the most tested therapies (n = 4 each). Only two studies used objective sleep measures in addition to self-report ratings, questionnaires or sleep diaries. Whilst calmer sleep with less body/leg movements and fewer awakenings could be achieved following opioid therapy, these might occur with increased sleep-disordered breathing and a much-shortened rapid eye movement (REM) sleep latency. Both the narrative synthesis and exploratory meta-analysis suggest that opioid therapy in CNP is associated with improved self-reported sleep quality. However, the effect is inconsistent, small (Standardised Mean Difference = 0.36), and may be accompanied by excessive daytime sleepiness. As a Cochrane-recommended assessment revealed "unclear" or "high" overall risk of bias for all studies, future opioid trials of stronger methodology and better reporting are needed to confirm and elucidate the effect.

A cross-sectional survey of general practice health workers' perceptions of their provision of culturally competent services to ethnic minority people with diabetes.

AIMS: To explore General Practice teams cultural-competence, in particular, ethnicity, linguistic skillset and cultural awareness. The practice teams' access to diabetes-training, and overall perception of cultural-competence were also assessed. METHODS: A cross-sectional single-city-survey with one in three people with diabetes from an ethnic minority group, using 35 semi-structured questions was completed. Self-reported data analysed using descriptive statistics, interpreted with reference to the Culturally-Competent-Assessment-Tool. RESULTS: Thirty-four (52%) of all 66 practices in Coventry responded between November 2011 and January 2012. KEY FINDINGS: (1) One in five practice staff was from a minority group in contrast with one in ten of Coventry's population, (2) 164 practice staff (32%) spoke a second language relevant to the practice's minority population, (3) 56% of practices were highly culturally-competent at providing diabetes services for minority populations, (4) 94% of practices reported the ethnicity of their populations, and (5) the most frequently stated barriers to culturally-competent service delivery were language and knowledge of nutritional habits. CONCLUSIONS: Culturally-competent diabetes care is widespread across the city. Language barriers are being addressed, cultural knowledge of diabetes-related-nutrition requires further improvement. Further studies should investigate if structured cultural-competence training for diabetes service providers produces positive effects in diabetes-related outcome-measures in minority populations.

Sleep in patients with primary dystonia: A systematic review on the state of research and perspectives.

Patients with primary dystonia, the third most prevalent movement disorder, suffer from a markedly reduced quality of life. This might, at least in part, be mediated by non-motor symptoms, including sleep disturbances. Characterising and treating sleep disturbances might provide new inroads to improve relevant patient-centred outcomes. This review evaluates the state of research on sleep in patients with dystonia and outlines an agenda for future research. A literature search was performed in July 2014 using PubMed, Medline via Ovid, PsycInfo, PsycArticles via Proquest and Embase via Ovid. Search results were screened for eligibility by two independent raters. Peer-reviewed publications reporting on sleep in patients with primary dystonia were included. Of 1445 studies identified through the search strategy, 18 met the inclusion criteria. In total, the included studies reported on 708 patients diagnosed with focal dystonia (cervical dystonia or blepharospasm), torsion dystonia, and dopa-responsive dystonia. The results indicate that at least half of the patients with focal cranial dystonia suffer from sleep disturbances, but excessive daytime sleepiness is uncommon. Sleep disturbance is associated with depressive symptoms. The frequency and duration of dystonic movements is markedly reduced during sleep. Reduced sleep quality appears to persist after treatment with botulinum toxin that successfully reduces motor symptoms. The findings are limited by a high clinical and methodological heterogeneity. Future research is needed to i) further characterize subjective and PSG sleep in patients with different types of dystonia, ii) determine the aetiology of sleep disturbances (e.g., abnormal brain function associated with dystonia, side effects of medication, psychological reasons), and iii) test whether targeted sleep interventions improve sleep and quality of life in patients with primary dystonia.