Perioperative pain optimization in the age of the opioid epidemic.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The opioid epidemic remains a constant and increasing threat to our society with overdoses and overdose deaths rising significantly during the COVID-19 pandemic. Growing evidence suggests a link between perioperative opioid use, postoperative opioid prescribing, and the development of opioid use disorder (OUD). As a result, strategies to better optimize pain management during the perioperative period are urgently needed. The purpose of this review is to summarize the most recent multimodal analgesia (MMA) recommendations, summarize evidence for efficacy surrounding the increased utilization of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols, and discuss the implications for rising use of buprenorphine for OUD patients who present for surgery. In addition, this review will explore opportunities to expand our treatment of complex patients via transitional pain services. RECENT FINDINGS: There is ample evidence to support the benefits of MMA. However, optimal drug combinations remain understudied, presenting a target area for future research. ERAS protocols provide a more systematic and targeted approach for implementing MMA. ERAS protocols also allow for a more comprehensive approach to perioperative pain management by necessitating the involvement of surgical specialists. Increasingly, OUD patients taking buprenorphine are presenting for surgery. Recent guidance from a multisociety OUD working group recommends that buprenorphine not be routinely discontinued or tapered perioperatively. Lastly, there is emerging evidence to justify the use of transitional pain services for more comprehensive treatment of complex patients, like those with chronic pain, preoperative opioid tolerance, or substance use disorder. SUMMARY: Perioperative physicians must be aware of the impact of the opioid epidemic and explore methods like MMA techniques, ERAS protocols, and transitional pain services to improve the perioperative pain experience and decrease the risks of opioid-related harm.

Precipitated opioid withdrawal in a patient started on olanzapine/samidorphan.

BACKGROUND: Olanzapine/Samidorphan (Lybalvi®) is a novel oral agent for the treatment of schizophrenia and bipolar I disorder. It was designed to reduce weight gain associated with olanzapine. Samidorphan is an analog of naltrexone, initially intended to treat substance use disorders by antagonizing mu, delta, and kappa opioid receptors. CASE REPORT: We present the case of a 36-year-old who took their first dose of olanzapine/samidorphan shortly before calling for emergency services. The patient took diphenhydramine and an epinephrine autoinjector for what they thought was an allergic reaction but continued to have symptoms. EMS reported involuntary muscle movements thought to be due to dystonia from olanzapine. In the ED, they experienced generalized muscle spasms lasting for several seconds and diaphoresis. Initially, the staff treated for a presumed dystonic reaction to olanzapine and administered diphenhydramine 25 mg IV, diazepam 2 mg IV, midazolam 5 mg IV, and benztropine 1 mg IV without improvement. It was later determined that the patient took 16 mg of buprenorphine SL daily. With this information, precipitated opioid withdrawal was felt to be the likely cause of symptoms. The patient received 16 mg of buprenorphine for an initial Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale (COWS) score of 11 with repeat COWS of 6. Why should an emergency physician be aware of this? Initiating olanzapine/samidorphan in the setting of chronic opioid therapy may result in precipitated opioid withdrawal. Additional SL buprenorphine may be a reasonable treatment modality.

The Devil's in the Depot Details: Case of Iatrogenic Opioid Intoxication After Buprenorphine Injection Requiring Surgical Excision.

ABSTRACT: Monthly long-acting injectable buprenorphine (LAI-BUP) is a treatment option for moderate to severe opioid use disorder. Safe administration of LAI-BUP requires preexisting opioid tolerance to prevent sedation and respiratory depression. In the event of adverse medication effects including oversedation, LAI-BUP can be surgically excised up to 14 days after administration ( https://www.sublocadehcp.com/dosing-administration ). However, the manufacturer does not provide guidance on the proper procedure for excision, and no case reports have been published documenting this procedure. We report a case of a man with methamphetamine use disorder and multiple unintentional fentanyl overdoses who inadvertently received LAI-BUP for overdose protection. This resulted in significant sedation for days, ultimately necessitating excision 5 days after administration. His sedation improved moderately at 24 hours after excision and significantly by 36 hours after excision. Providers seeking to use LAI-BUP to prevent overdose among those with unintentional opioid exposure must ensure sublingual buprenorphine tolerance before injection to avoid iatrogenic harm. Although manufacturer instructions mention that LAI-BUP can be excised under local anesthesia within 14 days of insertion, ideal excision is best performed in a setting with surgical instruments and cautery-such as the operating room-as the depot can adhere strongly to the surrounding subcutaneous tissue.

Serotonin therapies for opioid-induced disordered swallow and respiratory depression.

Opioids are well-known to cause respiratory depression, but despite clinical evidence of dysphagia, the effects of opioids on swallow excitability and motor pattern are unknown. We tested the effects of the clinically relevant opioid buprenorphine on pharyngeal swallow and respiratory drive in male and female rats. We also evaluated the utility of 5-HT1A agonists (8-OH-DPAT and buspirone) to improve swallowing and breathing following buprenorphine administration. Experiments were performed on 44 freely breathing Sprague-Dawley rats anesthetized with sodium pentobarbital. Bipolar fine wire electrodes were inserted into the mylohyoid, thyroarytenoid, posterior cricoarytenoid, thyropharyngeus, and diaphragm muscles to measure electromyographic (EMG) activity of swallowing and breathing. We evaluated the hypotheses that swallowing varies by stimulus, opioids depress swallowing and breathing, and that 5-HT1A agonists improve these depressions. Our results largely confirmed the following hypotheses: 1) swallow-related EMG activity was larger during swallows elicited by esophageal distension plus oral water infusion than by either stimulus alone. 2) Buprenorphine depressed swallow in both sexes, but females were more susceptible to total swallow suppression. 3) Female animals were also more vulnerable to opioid-induced respiratory depression. 4) 8-OH-DPAT rescued breathing following buprenorphine-induced respiratory arrest, and pretreatment with the partial 5-HT1A agonist buspirone prevented buprenorphine-induced respiratory arrest in female animals. 5) 8-OH-DPAT enhanced mylohyoid and thyropharyngeus EMG amplitude during swallow but did not restore excitability of the swallow pattern generator following total suppression by buprenorphine. Our results highlight sex-specific and behavior-specific effects of buprenorphine and provide preclinical evidence of a 5HT1A agonist for the treatment of respiratory depression and dysphagia.NEW & NOTEWORTHY This is the first study, to our knowledge, to evaluate sex-specific effects of opioid administration on pharyngeal swallow. We expand on a small but growing number of studies that report a lower threshold for opioid-induced respiratory depression in females compared with males, and we are the first to produce this effect with the partial µ-opioid-receptor agonist buprenorphine. This is the first demonstration, to our knowledge, that activation of 5-HT1A receptors can improve swallow and breathing outcomes following systemic buprenorphine administration.

Neurocognitive Functions After 6-Month Buprenorphine (Naloxone)-Based Opioid Agonist Maintenance Treatment: A Controlled Prospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Medications for opioid use disorder (OUD) may influence neurocognitive functions. Inadequate power, confounders, and practice effects limit the validity of the existing research. We examined the change in cognitive functions in patients with OUD at 6-month buprenorphine (naloxone) posttreatment and compared the cognitive performance of the buprenorphine-treated group with control subjects. METHODS: We recruited 498 patients with OUD within a week of initiating buprenorphine. Assessments were done twice-at baseline and 6 months. Those abstinent from illicit opioids and adherent to treatment (n = 199) underwent follow-up assessments. Ninety-eight non-substance-using control subjects were recruited from the community. The neurocognitive assessments comprised the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test, Iowa Gambling Task, Trail-Making Tests A and B (TMT-A and TMT-B), and verbal and visual N-Back Test. We controlled for potential effect modifiers. RESULTS: Twenty-five of the 32 test parameters significantly improved with 6 months of buprenorphine treatment; 20 parameters withstood corrections for multiple comparisons (P < 0.001). The improved test domains spread across cognitive tests: Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (perseverative errors and response, categories completed, conceptual responses), TMTs (time to complete), verbal and visual N-Back Tests (hits, omission, and total errors). After treatment, OUD (vs control subjects) had less perseverative response and error (P < 0.001) and higher conceptual response (P = 0.004) and took lesser time to complete TMT-A (P < 0.001) and TMT-B (P = 0.005). The baseline neurocognitive functions did not differ between those who retained and those who discontinued the treatment. CONCLUSION: Cognitive functions improve in patients with OUD on buprenorphine. This improvement is unlikely to be accounted for by the practice effect, selective attrition, and potential confounders.

First Trimester Use of Buprenorphine or Methadone and the Risk of Congenital Malformations.

Importance: Use of buprenorphine or methadone to treat opioid use disorder is recommended in pregnancy; however, their teratogenic potential is largely unknown. Objective: To compare the risk of congenital malformations following in utero exposure to buprenorphine vs methadone. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based cohort study used health care utilization data from publicly insured Medicaid beneficiaries in the US from 2000 to 2018. A total of 13 360 pregnancies with enrollment from 90 days prior to pregnancy start through 1 month after delivery and first trimester use of buprenorphine or methadone were included and linked to infants. Data were analyzed from July to December 2022. Exposure: A pharmacy dispensing of buprenorphine or a code for administration of methadone in the first trimester. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes included major malformations overall and malformations previously associated with opioids (any cardiac malformations, ventricular septal defect, secundum atrial septal defect/nonprematurity-related patent foramen ovale, neural tube defects, clubfoot, and oral clefts). Secondary outcomes included other organ system-specific malformations. Risk differences and risk ratios (RRs) were estimated comparing buprenorphine with methadone, adjusting for confounders with propensity score overlap weights. Results: The cohort included 9514 pregnancies with first-trimester buprenorphine exposure (mean [SD] maternal age, 28.4 [4.6] years) and 3846 with methadone exposure (mean [SD] maternal age, 28.8 [4.7] years). The risk of malformations overall was 50.9 (95% CI, 46.5-55.3) per 1000 pregnancies for buprenorphine and 60.6 (95% CI, 53.0-68.1) per 1000 pregnancies for methadone. After confounding adjustment, buprenorphine was associated with a lower risk of malformations compared with methadone (RR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.69-0.97). Risk was lower with buprenorphine for cardiac malformations (RR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.47-0.85), including both ventricular septal defect (RR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.39-0.98) and secundum atrial septal defect/nonprematurity-related patent foramen ovale (RR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.30-0.97), oral clefts (RR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.35-1.19), and clubfoot (RR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.32-0.94). Results for neural tube defects were uncertain given low event counts. In secondary analyses, buprenorphine was associated with a decreased risk of central nervous system, urinary, and limb malformations but a greater risk of gastrointestinal malformations compared with methadone. These findings were consistent in sensitivity and bias analyses. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, the risk of most malformations previously associated with opioid exposure was lower in buprenorphine-exposed infants compared with methadone-exposed infants, independent of measured confounders. Malformation risk is one factor that informs the individualized patient decision regarding medications for opioid use disorder in pregnancy.

Extended-release buprenorphine in pregnancy.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The relative safety and efficacy of monthly extended-release buprenorphine (XR-BUP) has not been fully evaluated in pregnant persons. METHODS: Case report of two pregnant individuals receiving XR-BUP while pregnant. RESULTS: Both patients had positive experiences and healthy infants. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Sparse data regarding the use of XR-BUP in pregnant patients limits shared decision-making. Additional evidence will support the growing population of pregnant patients exposed to XR-BUP. SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: Positive patient experiences using XR-BUP during pregnancy have been previously unreported. This report will contribute to discussions of risks and benefits for future patients using XR-BUP during pregnancy.

Opioids in geriatric units in 14 Belgian hospitals: prevalence, dosage and associated factors.

Introduction: Adverse effects of opioids are common among older individuals, and undertreatment as well as overuse can be an issue. Epidemiological data on opioid use in older individuals are available, but scarce in hospitalized patients.Aims: The aim of this study is to examine the one-day prevalence of opioid use among older inpatients and identify the factors associated with both opioid use and dosage.Materials and methods: One-day cross-sectional study with data collected from geriatric units across 14 Belgian hospitals. The primary focus of the study is to assess the prevalence of opioid use and dosage, along with identifying associated factors. To achieve this, a multiple binary logistic regression model was fitted for opioid use, and a multiple linear regression model for opioid dose.Results: Opioids were used in 24.4% of 784 patients, of which 57.9% was treated with tramadol, 13.2% with oxycodone or morphine and 28.9% with transdermal buprenorphine or fentanyl. The odds for opioid use were 4.2 times higher in patients in orthogeriatric units compared to other patients (OR=4.2, 95% CI=2.50-7.05). The prevalence of opioid use was 34% higher in patients without dementia compared to patients with dementia (OR=0.66, 95% CI=0.46-0.95). The overall mean daily dosage was 14.07mg subcutaneous morphine equivalent. After adjustment for age, gender and dementia, dosage was only associated with type of opioid: the estimated mean opioid dose was 70% lower with tramadol (mean ratio=0,30,95% CI=0,23-0,39) and 67% lower with oxycodone and morphine (mean ratio=0,33, 95% CI=0,22-0,48) compared to transdermal buprenorphine and transdermal fentanyl.Conclusions: One in four patients received opioid treatment. It is not clear whether this reflects under- or overtreatment, but these results can serve as a benchmark for geriatric units to guide future pain management practices. The utilization of transdermal fentanyl and buprenorphine, resulting in higher doses of morphine equivalent, poses significant risks for side effects.

Buprenorphine Versus Diclofenac for Pain Relief in Acute Pancreatitis: A Double-Blinded Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Although both nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and opioids are used for analgesia in acute pancreatitis (AP), the analgesic of choice is not known. We compared buprenorphine, an opioid, and diclofenac, an NSAID, for analgesia in AP. METHODS: In a double-blind randomized controlled trial, AP patients were randomized to receive intravenous diclofenac or intravenous buprenorphine. Fentanyl was used as rescue analgesia, delivered through a patient-controlled analgesia pump. Primary outcome was the difference in the dose of rescue fentanyl required. Secondary outcomes were the number of effective and ineffective demands of rescue fentanyl, pain-free interval, reduction in visual analogue scale (VAS) score, adverse events, and organ failure development. RESULTS: Twenty-four patients were randomized to diclofenac and 24 to buprenorphine. The 2 groups were matched at baseline. The total amount of rescue fentanyl required was significantly lower in the buprenorphine group:130 µg, interquartile range (IQR), 80-255 vs 520 µg, IQR, 380-1065 (P < .001). The number of total demands was 32 (IQR, 21-69) in the diclofenac arm vs 8 (IQR, 4-15) in the buprenorphine arm (P < .001). The buprenorphine group had more prolonged pain-free interval (20 vs 4 hours; P < .001), with greater reduction in the VAS score at 24, 48, and 72 hours compared with the diclofenac group. These findings were confirmed in the subgroup of moderately severe/severe pancreatitis. Adverse events profile was similar in the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with diclofenac, buprenorphine appears to be more effective and equally safe for pain management in AP patients, even in the subcohort of moderately severe or severe pancreatitis (Trial Registration number: CTRI/2020/07/026914).

Low-dose Induction of Buprenorphine in Pregnancy: A Case Series.

BACKGROUND: Because of a risk of precipitated withdrawal occurring from buprenorphine induction in people who use fentanyl, low-dose inductions are becoming increasingly common. However, little evidence exists on the use of this method in pregnant people. METHODS: We conducted a case series of all pregnant people treated for opioid use disorder with low-dose buprenorphine induction at the University of Maryland Medical Center between January 1, 2021, and August 22, 2022. Primary outcome was completion of induction regimen. Secondary outcomes were self-report of withdrawal, continuation of buprenorphine until delivery, and return to or continuation of illicit opioid use. RESULTS: Six pregnant people were prescribed a total of 10 buprenorphine inductions. Five of the 6 pregnant people (83.3%) completed at least 1 induction, none of whom experienced precipitated withdrawal. Two of 6 (33.3%) continued buprenorphine until the time of delivery, and 1 of 6 (16.7%) abstained from illicit opioid use. CONCLUSIONS: The low-dose buprenorphine induction regimen described was successful in 5 of 6 pregnant individuals. Further research, particularly regarding continuation rates, is needed.

Dental Disorders Reported to the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System in Association with Buprenorphine: An Analysis by Ingredient Composition and Route of Administration.

BACKGROUND: Prior research has suggested buprenorphine-containing medications may be associated with an increased risk of dental disorders. However, published data describing adverse dental reactions in buprenorphine users by active ingredient composition and route of administration are limited. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the influence of formulation on spontaneous reporting of dental disorders among patients treated with buprenorphine. METHODS: Adverse event reports submitted to the United States Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) between 2015 and 2022 were analyzed. Reporting odds ratios (ROR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated to measure disproportionality of dental disorder reporting as classified by 39 Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities preferred terms. RESULTS: Compared to pooled reports for all other drugs across FAERS, both buprenorphine monotherapy (ROR 3.09; 95% CI 2.61-3.66) and combination buprenorphine/naloxone (ROR 14.61; 95% CI 13.34-16.01) were associated with positive disproportionality signals. Signals of disproportionate dental disorder reporting were also detected for buprenorphine medicines administered by sublingual (ROR 20.03; 95% CI 18.04-22.24), buccal (ROR 4.46; 95% CI 3.00-6.61) and oral (ROR 7.17; 95% CI 5.03-10.22) routes, but not for other modalities. In considering active ingredient and route together, sublingual buprenorphine monotherapies (ROR 23.55; 95% CI 17.84-31.11) and sublingual buprenorphine/naloxone (ROR 19.47; 95% CI 17.39-21.80) were each associated with disproportionate reporting of dental disorders. CONCLUSION: Subject to the limitations of spontaneous adverse event data, this study identified significantly disproportionate reporting of dental disorders to FAERS among patients treated with buprenorphine- containing medications, including formulations administered by sublingual, buccal and oral routes. These findings are consistent with prior data and suggest that regular oral care and proper dental hygiene be emphasized for patients undergoing therapy with orally dissolving buprenorphine.

Regional tissue oxygenation in asymptomatic neonates at high risk for neonatal abstinence syndrome and impact of non-pharmacologic interventions: A case report.

BACKGROUND: Improving neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) management is an important concern, and objective measures of its physiologic impact remain elusive. We sought to determine whether near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS)-derived tissue oxygenation (rSO2) and fractional tissue oxygen extraction (FTOE) demonstrated physiologically plausible changes correlating with standard NAS scoring. METHODS: Thirty subjects (mean 39 weeks' GA and 3 127 g BW) underwent cerebral and peripheral muscle NIRS monitoring on Days of Life (DOL) Three, Five, and Seven. We examined correlations between NAS scores and FTOE and assessed the impact of non-pharmacologic swaddling and cuddling. RESULTS: No statistically significant correlations between NAS scores and FTOE were observed; however, plausible trends were demonstrated between NAS scores and cerebral measurements. Buprenorphine-exposed babies (57%) showed significantly lower FTOE when swaddled (DOL7). CONCLUSIONS: Tissue oxygenation monitoring demonstrates potential to provide objective, clinically relevant physiologic information on infants at risk for NAS. Further study is required to determine whether NIRS-derived measures could assist in individualizing NAS care.

Nonprescription use of buprenorphine tablets among patients at a tertiary care addictive disorder treatment center in India: Observa-tions and implications.

OBJECTIVE: Nonprescribed use of drugs is a clinical and public health challenge fueled by diversion of controlled opioids like buprenorphine. In this study, we report the nonprescription use of buprenorphine and buprenorphine-naloxone for the first time in India. DESIGN: A cross-sectional observational study utilizing semistructured interviews. SETTING: A tertiary care addictive disorder treatment center in India, which provides inpatient and outpatient medically oriented care that includes agonist treatment (buprenorphine) or detoxification and antagonist treatment (naltrexone). PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged 18-65 years, registered at the center, and who had a history of current (within the past 6 months) nonprescription use of buprenorphine tablets were recruited. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Participants were questioned about demographic and clinical factors and details of nonprescription use of buprenorphine and buprenorphine-naloxone using a structured questionnaire. Since both buprenorphine with naloxone and buprenorphine without naloxone are available and transacted on the street "loose" out of the blister packs, we were unable to differentiate the use of plain buprenorphine and a combination of buprenorphine- naloxone. RESULTS: A majority of the participants used nonprescribed tablets buprenorphine and buprenorphine-naloxone with an intent to control the withdrawal symptoms, and the reason for this use was that other patients shared their prescriptions of these medications. About half of the participants injected the tablets, and liquid pheniramine was most commonly used as the solvent for dissolving the tablets. A "high" was perceived by around half of those who injected. Participants reported knowing, on an average, around 13 peers who injected the tablet buprenorphine or -buprenorphine-naloxone. CONCLUSION: Nonprescription use of tablets buprenorphine and -buprenorphine-naloxone is a clinical concern and also an important public health issue. Geographical and systemic expansions of the availability of buprenorphine may reduce the "demand" for nonprescribed buprenorphine, while the opportunities for diversion from treatment centers can be minimized through more careful clinical prescriptions and monitoring practices.

Maternal care behavior and physiology moderate offspring outcomes following gestational exposure to opioids.

The opioid epidemic has resulted in a drastic increase in gestational exposure to opioids. Opioid-dependent pregnant women are typically prescribed medications for opioid use disorders ("MOUD"; e.g., buprenorphine [BUP]) to mitigate the harmful effects of abused opioids. However, the consequences of exposure to synthetic opioids, particularly BUP, during gestation on fetal neurodevelopment and long-term outcomes are poorly understood. Further, despite the known adverse effects of opioids on maternal care, many preclinical and clinical studies investigating the effects of gestational opioid exposure on offspring outcomes fail to report on maternal care behaviors. Considering that offspring outcomes are heavily dependent upon the quality of maternal care, it is important to evaluate the effects of gestational opioid exposure in the context of the mother-infant dyad. This review compares offspring outcomes after prenatal opioid exposure and after reduced maternal care and integrates this information to potentially identify common underlying mechanisms. We explore whether adverse outcomes after gestational BUP exposure are due to direct effects of opioids in utero, deficits in maternal care, or a combination of both factors. Finally, suggestions for improving preclinical models of prenatal opioid exposure are provided to promote more translational studies that can help to improve clinical outcomes for opioid-dependent mothers.

18-Month efficacy and safety analysis of monthly subcutaneous buprenorphine injection for opioid use disorder: Integrated analysis of phase 3 studies.

BACKGROUND: Few studies investigate the natural history of patients on long-term treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD). We evaluated the long-term efficacy, safety, and tolerability experience of monthly extended-release buprenorphine (BUP-XR) in participants seeking treatment for OUD, via integrated analysis of phase 3 studies. METHODS: Study 1 was a 24-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of participants receiving monthly injections of BUP-XR (300 mg × 2, 100 mg × 4 [n = 203] or 300 mg × 6 [n = 201]) or placebo (n = 100). Study 2 was a 48-week, open-label trial enrolling 257 participants who completed study 1 and 412 de novo participants, to receive 6 and 12 BUP-XR injections, respectively. Study 3 was a 24-week, open-label extension enrolling 208 participants who completed study 2 for 6 additional injections. We assessed opioid abstinence as the proportion of urine opioid negative participants by visit and the percentage of each participant's negative opioid assessments during the first 6 months. RESULTS: In total, 916 participants were treated with BUP-XR or placebo. By the end of 18 months, 92.7 % of the de novo cohort and 81.8 % of the study 1 cohort were urine negative for opioids. Among early nonresponders (percentage of abstinence ≤20 %), 73.1 % were urine negative after 18 months. The longer treatment period was well tolerated, with no new safety concerns, and a low incidence of opioid withdrawal signs and symptoms, and hepatic disorder. CONCLUSIONS: Extending BUP-XR treatment beyond 6 months sustained improvement in opioid abstinence and was well tolerated, supporting clinical benefit up to 18 months. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02357901 (study 1); NCT02510014 (study 2); NCT02896296 (study 3).

Patient's perceptions of buprenorphine use receiving treatment for cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To assess knowledge and attitudes toward opioids and buprenorphine (BUP) of patients with cancer. DESIGN: Single-site, single-intervention telephone survey of patients under palliative care at the cancer center. OUTCOMES: Forty percent of the participants recognized the word "buprenorphine," and 28 percent recognized BUP indication for addiction treatment. Four percent addressed potential BUP misuse. None recognized BUP indication for pain. Seventy-one percent were not worried about addiction or dependency while using opioids to treat their cancer-related-pain, and 73 percent were not worried about being stigmatized in the healthcare setting about their pain regimens. Patients on opioids for less than 3 months were most strongly correlated with the fear of addiction and stigma. CONCLUSION: This study identifies patients' knowledge gap regarding BUP products for pain, which gives professionals the opportunity to provide education. This study identified that patients are most worried early on about addiction and stigma when using opioids.

Effectiveness of Sublingual Buprenorphine for Pain Control in the ICU.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to compare pain control and opioid consumption in critically ill patients who were treated with buprenorphine sublingual or oxycodone oral/enteral during ICU admission. DESIGN: This was a retrospective, parallel, cohort study. SETTING: General medical or surgical ICUs of a quaternary, urban hospital in Sydney, NSW, Australia. PATIENTS: Data were obtained for all patients admitted to two general medical or surgical ICU from January 2019 to January 2023. Patients were grouped as those who received buprenorphine sublingual versus oxycodone oral/enteral. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Pain control was compared between a propensity score matched cohort of patients who received buprenorphine versus oxycodone. The primary outcome was the probability of significant pain. A significant pain score was defined as greater than or equal to 4 on the 0-10 Numeric Rating Scale or greater than or equal to 6 on the Behavioral Pain Scale. The study cohort included 1,070 patients (288 buprenorphine and 782 oxycodone). After propensity score matching, there were 288 patients in each group. The mean age of the matched cohort was 64 ± 16 years, 295 (51%) were male, and 359 (62%) had a surgical admission. The median probability of significant pain was 0.16 with buprenorphine and 0.17 with oxycodone (median difference, 0.01; 95% CI, -0.02 to 0.04; p = 0.50). Median opioid consumption in oral morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) was 65 with buprenorphine and 70 with oxycodone (median difference, -1 mg; 95% CI, -10 to 10 mg; p = 0.73). Median MME per ICU day was 22 with buprenorphine and 22 with oxycodone (median difference, 1 mg; 95% CI, -2 to 5 mg; p = 0.38). CONCLUSIONS: Buprenorphine sublingual is as effective as oxycodone oral/enteral with regard to pain control and opioid consumption in the ICU. Buprenorphine sublingual is an appropriate option for patients in the ICU who are unable to take oral/enteral medications.