Prescribing databases can be used to monitor trends in opioid analgesic prescribing in Australia

Objective: There has been increased use of prescription opioid analgesics in Australia in the past 20 years with increasing evidence of related problems. A number of data sources collect information about the dispensed prescribing for opioid medications, but little is known about the extent to which these data sources agree on levels of opioid prescribing. Methods: In Queensland, all opioid prescriptions (S8 prescriptions) dispensed by community pharmacies must be submitted to the Drugs of Dependence Unit (DDU). This potentially comprises a gold standard' against which other data sources may be judged. There are two national data sources: the Pharmaceutical Benefits Schedule (PBS) for all medications subsidised by government; and an annual national survey of representative pharmacies, which assesses non-subsidised opioid prescribing. We examined the agreement between these data sources. Results: The three data sources provided consistent estimates of use over time. The correlations between different data sources were high for most opioid analgesics. There was a substantial (60%) increase in the dispensed use of opioid analgesics and a 180% increase in the dispensed use of oxycodone over the period 20022009. Tramadol was the most used opioid-like medication. Conclusions: Since 2002 different data sources reveal similar trends, namely a substantial increase in the prescribing of opioid medications. With few exceptions, the conclusions derived from using any of these data sources were similar. Implications: Improved access to PBS data for relevant stakeholders could provide an efficient and cost-effective way to monitor use of prescription opioid analgesics

Long-Term Opioid Contract Use for Chronic Pain Management in Primary Care Practice. A Five Year Experience

BACKGROUND: The use of opioid medications to manage chronic pain is complex and challenging, especially in primary care settings. Medication contracts are increasingly being used to monitor patient adherence, but little is known about the long-term outcomes of such contracts. OBJECTIVE: To describe the long-term outcomes of a medication contract agreement for patients receiving opioid medications in a primary care setting. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SUBJECTS: All patients placed on a contract for opioid medication between 1998 and 2003 in an academic General Internal Medicine teaching clinic. MEASUREMENTS: Demographics, diagnoses, opiates prescribed, urine drug screens, and reasons for contract cancellation were recorded. The association of physician contract cancellation with patient factors and medication types were examined using the Chi-square test and multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 330 patients constituting 4% of the clinic population were placed on contracts during the study period. Seventy percent were on indigent care programs. The majority had low back pain (38%) or fibromyalgia (23%). Contracts were discontinued in 37%. Only 17% were cancelled for substance abuse and noncompliance. Twenty percent discontinued contract voluntarily. Urine toxicology screens were obtained in 42% of patients of whom 38% were positive for illicit substances. CONCLUSIONS: Over 60% of patients adhered to the contract agreement for opioids with a median follow-up of 22.5 months. Our experience provides insight into establishing a systematic approach to opioid administration and monitoring in primary care practices. A more structured drug testing strategy is needed to identify nonadherent patients

Towards improved decision support in the assessment and management of pain for people with dementia in hospital: a systematic meta-review and observational study

BackgroundPain and dementia are common in older people, and impaired cognitive abilities make it difficult for them to communicate their pain. Pain, if poorly managed, impairs health and well-being. Accurate pain assessment in this vulnerable group is challenging for hospital staff, but essential for appropriate management. Robust methods for identifying, assessing and managing pain are needed.Aims and objectivesTwo studies were undertaken to inform the development of a decision support tool to aid hospital staff in the recognition, assessment and management of pain. The first was a meta-review of systematic reviews of observational pain assessment instruments with three objectives: (1) to identify the tools available to assess pain in adults with dementia; (2) to identify in which settings they were used and with what patient populations; and (3) to assess their reliability, validity and clinical utility. The second was a multisite observational study in hospitals with four objectives: (1) to identify information currently used by clinicians when detecting and managing pain in patients with dementia; (2) to explore existing processes for detecting and managing pain in these patients; (3) to identify the role (actual/potential) of carers in this process; and (4) to explore the organisational context in which health professionals operate. Findings also informed development of health economics data collection forms to evaluate the implementation of a new decision support intervention in hospitals.MethodsFor the meta-review of systematic reviews, 12 databases were searched. Reviews of observational pain assessment instruments that provided psychometric data were included. Papers were quality assessed and data combined using narrative synthesis. The observational study used an ethnographic approach in 11 wards in four UK hospitals. This included non-participant observation of 31 patients, audits of patient records, semistructured interviews with 52 staff and four carers, informal conversations with staff and carers and analysis of ward documents and policies. Thematic analysis of the data was undertaken by the project team.ResultsData from eight systematic reviews including 28 tools were included in the meta-review. Most tools showed moderate to good reliability, but information about validity, feasibility and clinical utility was scarce. The observational study showed complex ward cultures and routines, with variations in time spent with patients, communication patterns and management practices. Carer involvement was rare. No pain decision support tools were observed in practice. Information about pain was elicited in different ways, at different times, by different health-care staff and recorded in separate documents. Individual staff made sense of patients’ pain by creating their own ‘overall picture’ from available information.LimitationsGrey literature and non-English-language papers were excluded from the meta-review. Sample sizes in the observational study were smaller than planned owing to poor documentation of patients’ dementia diagnoses, gatekeeping by staff and difficulties in gaining consent/assent. Many patients had no or geographically distant carers, or a spouse who was too unwell and/or reluctant to participate.ConclusionsNo single observational pain scale was clearly superior to any other. The traditional linear concept of pain being assessed, treated and reassessed by single individuals did not ‘fit’ with clinical reality. A new approach enabling effective communication among patients, carers and staff, centralised recording of pain-related information, and an extended range of pain management interventions is proposed [Pain And Dementia Decision Support (PADDS)]. This was not tested with users, but a follow-on study aims to codesign PADDS with carers and clinicians, then introduce education on staff/patient/carer communications and use of PADDS within a structured implementation plan. PADDS will need to be tested in differing ward contexts

Increasing trends in Schedule II opioid use and doctor shopping during 1999-2007 in California †

PURPOSE: To examine the age and gender-specific trends of schedule II opioid use among California residents, with special reference to multiple provider users (“doctor shoppers”). METHODS: Utilizing data from the California Prescription Drug Monitoring Program, we examined age and gender-specific trends of Schedule II opioid use during calendar years 1999–2007. Specifically, we analyzed: 1) the prevalence of Schedule II opioid users among California’s population, and 2) the proportion of these opioid users who were doctor shoppers (defined as an individual who used more than five different prescribers for all schedule II opioids he/she obtained in a calendar year). RESULTS: Among all age and gender groups, the prevalence of Schedule II opioid users in California increased by 150%–280% and the prevalence of doctor shoppers among users increased by 111%–213% over nine years. The prevalence of opioid users was lowest among 18–44 year-old males (1.25%) and highest among 65 years and older females (5.31%) by 2007. The prevalence of doctor shoppers was approximately 1.4% among those up to age 64 and 0.5% among those 65 years and older. The gender difference in doctor shoppers among all age groups was negligible. On average, the cumulative morphine-equivalent amount of Schedule II opioid per individual obtained per year was three- to six-fold higher for doctor shoppers than for the general population across different age and gender groups. CONCLUSIONS: Age and gender differences in opioid use were relatively small, while the trends for use of opioids and multiple providers grew at a disquieting rate