The prescription opioid epidemic in a nutshell

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
so we use case fatality rate to determine whether to put people on opioids?

yes case dependent, but for someone who has presented himself as a limited opioid and low dose opioid proponent, your support of prescribing 240 MED for a patient that is not end of life with potentially significant comorbidities seems oddly inconsistent.

Members don't see this ad.
 
so we use case fatality rate to determine whether to put people on opioids?

yes case dependent, but for someone who has presented himself as a limited opioid and low dose opioid proponent, your support of prescribing 240 MED for a patient that is not end of life with potentially significant comorbidities seems oddly inconsistent.
Compared to fibromyalgia? You’re twisting words like a sheepydemocrat. We know nothing about the care of the patient or what is wrong with them. To say no opiates, or a limit is unreasonable without knowing more. Based on the complete lack of clinical data I would suggest getting more data.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
End stage fibromyalgia + brachioradial pruritis, moderately severe leaky gut and adrenal fatigue.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Members don't see this ad :)
How quickly would you wean someone who is on high dose (100 oxy, inherited patient) who fails a UDS? (Benzo, not in PDMP)? I don’t have experience with quicker tapers. Thanks.
 
How quickly would you wean someone who is on high dose (100 oxy, inherited patient) who fails a UDS? (Benzo, not in PDMP)? I don’t have experience with quicker tapers. Thanks.
Lots of depends upons.

Could argue patient is acute danger go themselves and poses risk of OD death doe to combination. Your next rx could be their last. Then coroner notifies medical board and you are in a world of hurt. This is worst case scenario. Could lead to criminal charges and not just action on license. But unlikely. Ask patient where it came from and how much they take. Could be just one time diversion. But you need to document and note must reflect a clear plan of care.
 
I find that most people are as smart as they are a conservative...

i guess MTG is the exception that proves the rule? or maybe i could give you 1000 other examples.


by any metric --IQ tests, jeopardy winners, etc, your premise is false

also, Einstein -- liberal
 
The actuarial probability of survival for these patients was 97% at one year and 71% at ten years. Only three CP treated patients (10%) progressed to end-stage renal disease. The case fatality rate was 26% (eight patients) and sepsis was the cause of death in five. WG and not FMS.
97% survival rate 1 year seems pretty good.

Compared to fibromyalgia? You’re twisting words like a sheepydemocrat. We know nothing about the care of the patient or what is wrong with them. To say no opiates, or a limit is unreasonable without knowing more. Based on the complete lack of clinical data I would suggest getting more data.
So..

If this person comes in to your office, like hundreds of others on high dose opioids have, are you taking over their meds?

Because if you say yes, that runs counter to what you have said in the past.
 
97% survival rate 1 year seems pretty good.


So..

If this person comes in to your office, like hundreds of others on high dose opioids have, are you taking over their meds?

Because if you say yes, that runs counter to what you have said in the past.
I wouldn't. I don't do over 90meq unless PC. If she is already PC then does not need me. But if her doc has her on that and keeping her pain controlled, I would not offer a glowing response to DEA or medical board for this. This can be within the standard of care. Depends on the chart and the patient.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

Fun read. The guy who committed suicide had 3 of his doctors shut down by the DEA.
I think reality is thin, you know, thin as lake ice after a thaw, and we fill our lives with noise and light and motion to hide that thinness from ourselves.

— S. King
 
  • Like
  • Hmm
Reactions: 1 users
Members don't see this ad :)
My thoughts as I read the article:

1. Wow, being electrocuted the way he was and having terrible migraines must suck, but opioids are not appropriate treatment for migraines because they lead to worsening rebound headaches.

2. I wonder why he was having trouble if he was only on a fentanyl patch? There must be more to the story, maybe he was on a benzo or something.

3. "He was using fentanyl patches and lozenges..." Oh.

4. "as he spoke with VICE News at the funeral" What was VICE News doing at this mans funeral?!?

5. "Danny and his wife would fly from Georgia to Los Angeles for appointments" Holy crap.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
We don’t know any doses, but I expect he was on many hundreds of micrograms per hour of fentanyl.

These articles always try and paint a picture by describing an initial injury, such as getting electrocuted, as if the injury justifies a mega opioid dose for some reason.

Did the DEA really cause this suicide, or did the three “pain specialists” who escalated this patient to mega doses and then lost their license to prescribe kill this patient.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
We don’t know any doses, but I expect he was on many hundreds of micrograms per hour of fentanyl.

These articles always try and paint a picture by describing an initial injury, such as getting electrocuted, as if the injury justifies a mega opioid dose for some reason.

Did the DEA really cause this suicide, or did the three “pain specialists” who escalated this patient to mega doses and then lost their license to prescribe kill this patient.
Nope it was the rest of us who refuse to see these trainwrecks.
 
Quite the coincidence, but I saw a mother-daugter chronic pain team today. It was mom's appointment, but at the end the daughter told me she's had chronic unilateral arm pain for the last 8 years since being electrocuted by an arc from a faucet during a nearby lightning strike. Naturally my first question was whether or not she would run out and pick up some powerball tickets for the office. She describes the sensastions she gets as sharp stabs of pain in the arm from the fingers to the head of the humerus, but no higher. There was no allodynia or CRPS stigmata. She's been treated with SNRIs and topiramate, but never any opiates. She seemed to be managing well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Comparative effectiveness and safety of analgesic medicines for adults with acute non-specific low back pain: systematic review and network meta-analysis

BMJ 2023; 380 doi: Comparative effectiveness and safety of analgesic medicines for adults with acute non-specific low back pain: systematic review and network meta-analysis (Published 22 March 2023)
Cite this as: BMJ 2023;380:e072962

Michael A Wewege, doctoral candidate12, Matthew K Bagg, postdoctoral fellow234, Matthew D Jones, postdoctoral fellow12, Michael C Ferraro, doctoral candidate12, Aidan G Cashin, postdoctoral fellow12, Rodrigo RN Rizzo, doctoral candidate12, Hayley B Leake, postdoctoral fellow25, Amanda D Hagstrom, senior lecturer1, Saurab Sharma, postdoctoral fellow12, Andrew J McLachlan, professor6, Christopher G Maher, professor78, Richard Day, professor910, Benedict M Wand, professor11, Neil E O’Connell, reader12, Adriani Nikolakopolou, postdoctoral fellow13, Siobhan Schabrun, professor21415, Sylvia M Gustin, professor216, James H McAuley, professor12

Author affiliations
Correspondence to: Prof James H McAuley [email protected] (or @pain_neura on Twitter)
Accepted 21 February 2023
Abstract
Objective To evaluate the comparative effectiveness and safety of analgesic medicines for acute non-specific low back pain.

Design Systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Data sources Medline, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov, clinicialtrialsregister.eu, and World Health Organization’s International Clinical Trials Registry Platform from database inception to 20 February 2022.

Eligibility criteria for study selection Randomised controlled trials of analgesic medicines (eg, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, paracetamol, opioids, anti-convulsant drugs, skeletal muscle relaxants, or corticosteroids) compared with another analgesic medicine, placebo, or no treatment. Adults (≥18 years) who reported acute non-specific low back pain (for less than six weeks).

Data extraction and synthesis Primary outcomes were low back pain intensity (0-100 scale) at end of treatment and safety (number of participants who reported any adverse event during treatment). Secondary outcomes were low back specific function, serious adverse events, and discontinuation from treatment. Two reviewers independently identified studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. A random effects network meta-analysis was done and confidence was evaluated by the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis method.

Results 98 randomised controlled trials (15 134 participants, 49% women) included 69 different medicines or combinations. Low or very low confidence was noted in evidence for reduced pain intensity after treatment with tolperisone (mean difference −26.1 (95% confidence intervals −34.0 to −18.2)), aceclofenac plus tizanidine (−26.1 (−38.5 to −13.6)), pregabalin (−24.7 (−34.6 to −14.7)), and 14 other medicines compared with placebo. Low or very low confidence was noted for no difference between the effects of several of these medicines. Increased adverse events had moderate to very low confidence with tramadol (risk ratio 2.6 (95% confidence interval 1.5 to 4.5)), paracetamol plus sustained release tramadol (2.4 (1.5 to 3.8)), baclofen (2.3 (1.5 to 3.4)), and paracetamol plus tramadol (2.1 (1.3 to 3.4)) compared with placebo. These medicines could increase the risk of adverse events compared with other medicines with moderate to low confidence. Moderate to low confidence was also noted for secondary outcomes and secondary analysis of medicine classes.

Conclusions The comparative effectiveness and safety of analgesic medicines for acute non-specific low back pain are uncertain. Until higher quality randomised controlled trials of head-to-head comparisons are published, clinicians and patients are recommended to take a cautious approach to manage acute non-specific low back pain with analgesic medicines.

Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42019145257
 
Comparative effectiveness and safety of analgesic medicines for adults with acute non-specific low back pain: systematic review and network meta-analysis

BMJ 2023; 380 doi: Comparative effectiveness and safety of analgesic medicines for adults with acute non-specific low back pain: systematic review and network meta-analysis (Published 22 March 2023)
Cite this as: BMJ 2023;380:e072962

Michael A Wewege, doctoral candidate12, Matthew K Bagg, postdoctoral fellow234, Matthew D Jones, postdoctoral fellow12, Michael C Ferraro, doctoral candidate12, Aidan G Cashin, postdoctoral fellow12, Rodrigo RN Rizzo, doctoral candidate12, Hayley B Leake, postdoctoral fellow25, Amanda D Hagstrom, senior lecturer1, Saurab Sharma, postdoctoral fellow12, Andrew J McLachlan, professor6, Christopher G Maher, professor78, Richard Day, professor910, Benedict M Wand, professor11, Neil E O’Connell, reader12, Adriani Nikolakopolou, postdoctoral fellow13, Siobhan Schabrun, professor21415, Sylvia M Gustin, professor216, James H McAuley, professor12

Author affiliations
Correspondence to: Prof James H McAuley [email protected] (or @pain_neura on Twitter)
Accepted 21 February 2023
Abstract
Objective To evaluate the comparative effectiveness and safety of analgesic medicines for acute non-specific low back pain.

Design Systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Data sources Medline, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov, clinicialtrialsregister.eu, and World Health Organization’s International Clinical Trials Registry Platform from database inception to 20 February 2022.

Eligibility criteria for study selection Randomised controlled trials of analgesic medicines (eg, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, paracetamol, opioids, anti-convulsant drugs, skeletal muscle relaxants, or corticosteroids) compared with another analgesic medicine, placebo, or no treatment. Adults (≥18 years) who reported acute non-specific low back pain (for less than six weeks).

Data extraction and synthesis Primary outcomes were low back pain intensity (0-100 scale) at end of treatment and safety (number of participants who reported any adverse event during treatment). Secondary outcomes were low back specific function, serious adverse events, and discontinuation from treatment. Two reviewers independently identified studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. A random effects network meta-analysis was done and confidence was evaluated by the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis method.

Results 98 randomised controlled trials (15 134 participants, 49% women) included 69 different medicines or combinations. Low or very low confidence was noted in evidence for reduced pain intensity after treatment with tolperisone (mean difference −26.1 (95% confidence intervals −34.0 to −18.2)), aceclofenac plus tizanidine (−26.1 (−38.5 to −13.6)), pregabalin (−24.7 (−34.6 to −14.7)), and 14 other medicines compared with placebo. Low or very low confidence was noted for no difference between the effects of several of these medicines. Increased adverse events had moderate to very low confidence with tramadol (risk ratio 2.6 (95% confidence interval 1.5 to 4.5)), paracetamol plus sustained release tramadol (2.4 (1.5 to 3.8)), baclofen (2.3 (1.5 to 3.4)), and paracetamol plus tramadol (2.1 (1.3 to 3.4)) compared with placebo. These medicines could increase the risk of adverse events compared with other medicines with moderate to low confidence. Moderate to low confidence was also noted for secondary outcomes and secondary analysis of medicine classes.

Conclusions The comparative effectiveness and safety of analgesic medicines for acute non-specific low back pain are uncertain. Until higher quality randomised controlled trials of head-to-head comparisons are published, clinicians and patients are recommended to take a cautious approach to manage acute non-specific low back pain with analgesic medicines.

Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42019145257
So medications don't seem to help when we don't know the diagnosis? I'm shocked.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 6 users
The VA updated their opioid guidelines:

“Perhaps the most noteworthy [addition to the guideline] suggests the use of buprenorphine for patients receiving daily opioids instead of full agonist opioids due to lower risk of overdose and misuse.

Of note, while the guideline recommends against initiating opioid therapy for the management of chronic pain, the authors emphasize that for patients already on opioids, any opioid tapering (if clinically indicated) should be done with a collaborative, patient-centered approach,”
 
The VA updated their opioid guidelines:

“Perhaps the most noteworthy [addition to the guideline] suggests the use of buprenorphine for patients receiving daily opioids instead of full agonist opioids due to lower risk of overdose and misuse.

Of note, while the guideline recommends against initiating opioid therapy for the management of chronic pain, the authors emphasize that for patients already on opioids, any opioid tapering (if clinically indicated) should be done with a collaborative, patient-centered approach,”
its about freaking time they discovered that buprenorphine is preferred over daily standard opioids.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
its about freaking time they discovered that buprenorphine is preferred over daily standard opioids.
Now we have to circle back around the the payors. There has also been regulatory guideline language in favor of abuse-deterrent formulations. Didn't make it any easier for patients to get their hands on the preferred treatment.
 
its still amazing that there are physicians who legitimately believe that they can get away with this type of behavior...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
So there’s no need to believe me a random user on the internet but I trained at the same institution with a preeminent expert in addiction medicine and also spoke to her for a research project and she unequivocally told me the benzo crisis will be huge in the near future. There’s a ton of data that too many people are on them, too many old people use them, too many generalists prescribe them, and they are (this is her field) absolutely terrible compared to opioids to detox or withdraw from. It has opened my eyes to the “next big thing.” We will see how it plays out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
I can't tell you how often I see older women (seems benzos are much more common in females) with dementia on benzos BID/TID.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Would love to see BZD prescribing by state as well as by demographic (both patient and physician).
Georgia seems high to me. 80 y/o on Xanax tid and Restoril for sleep. PCP prescribing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

Attachments

  • st,small,507x507-pad,600x600,f8f8f8.jpg
    st,small,507x507-pad,600x600,f8f8f8.jpg
    58.6 KB · Views: 47
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I guess you could say, "I told you so."


"Overall, these findings suggest that most people who initiate an opioid prescription are likely to have low, time-limited exposure to opioids with little indication of ongoing use. This possibility is an important consideration for policymakers and stakeholders considering population-level prescribing of high-risk drugs. Opioids are essential drugs for acute and cancer pain, and many people with CNCP benefit from opioids.31 Continued focus and policy responses based on findings from a small group of people with increased risk of harms run the risk of limiting access to people who safely derive objective benefits from opioids."


Original Investigation Pharmacy and Clinical Pharmacology

August 10, 2023

Five-Year Trajectories of Prescription Opioid Use

Natasa Gisev, PhD1; Luke Buizen, MBiostat1; Ria E. Hopkins, MPH1; et alAndrea L. Schaffer, PhD2,3; Benjamin Daniels, PhD4; Chrianna Bharat, PhD1; Timothy Dobbins, PhD4; Sarah Larney, PhD5; Fiona Blyth, PhD6; David C. Currow, PhD7; Andrew Wilson, PhD8; Sallie-Anne Pearson, PhD4,8; Louisa Degenhardt, PhD1
Author Affiliations Article Information
JAMA Netw Open. 2023;6(8):e2328159. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.28159

Key Points
Question What are the 5-year trajectories of opioid use following initiation, and what are the characteristics of different trajectory groups?

Findings In this population-based cohort study of 3.47 million adults, 5 trajectories of opioid use were identified. Approximately 3% of individuals were classified to the sustained use trajectory group, which was characterized by individuals with older age, a higher number of comorbidities, and higher use of psychotropic and other analgesic drugs and health services vs other trajectory groups.

Meaning Findings from this study suggest that, although most individuals who commenced prescription opioid treatment had low, time-limited exposure to opioids, the small proportion of adults with sustained or increasing opioid use had greater clinical complexity and treatment needs.

Abstract
Importance There are known risks of using opioids for extended periods. However, less is known about the long-term trajectories of opioid use following initiation.

Objective To identify 5-year trajectories of prescription opioid use, and to examine the characteristics of each trajectory group.

Design, Setting, and Participants This population-based cohort study conducted in New South Wales, Australia, linked national pharmaceutical claims data to 10 national and state data sets to determine sociodemographic characteristics, clinical characteristics, drug use, and health services use. The cohort included adult residents (aged ≥18 years) of New South Wales who initiated a prescription opioid between July 1, 2003, and December 31, 2018. Statistical analyses were conducted from February to September 2022.

Exposure Dispensing of a prescription opioid, with no evidence of opioid dispensing in the preceding 365 days, identified from pharmaceutical claims data.

Main Outcomes and Measures The main outcome was the trajectories of monthly opioid use over 60 months from opioid initiation. Group-based trajectory modeling was used to classify these trajectories. Linked health care data sets were used to examine characteristics of individuals in different trajectory groups.

Results Among 3 474 490 individuals who initiated a prescription opioid (1 831 230 females [52.7%]; mean [SD] age, 49.7 [19.3] years), 5 trajectories of long-term opioid use were identified: very low use (75.4%), low use (16.6%), moderate decreasing to low use (2.6%), low increasing to moderate use (2.6%), and sustained use (2.8%). Compared with individuals in the very low use trajectory group, those in the sustained use trajectory group were older (age ≥65 years: 22.0% vs 58.4%); had more comorbidities, including cancer (4.1% vs 22.2%); had increased health services contact, including hospital admissions (36.9% vs 51.6%); had higher use of psychotropic (16.4% vs 42.4%) and other analgesic drugs (22.9% vs 47.3%) prior to opioid initiation, and were initiated on stronger opioids (20.0% vs 50.2%).

Conclusions and relevance Results of this cohort study suggest that most individuals commencing treatment with prescription opioids had relatively low and time-limited exposure to opioids over a 5-year period. The small proportion of individuals with sustained or increasing use was older with more comorbidities and use of psychotropic and other analgesic drugs, likely reflecting a higher prevalence of pain and treatment needs in these individuals.
 
I guess you could say, "I told you so."


"Overall, these findings suggest that most people who initiate an opioid prescription are likely to have low, time-limited exposure to opioids with little indication of ongoing use. This possibility is an important consideration for policymakers and stakeholders considering population-level prescribing of high-risk drugs. Opioids are essential drugs for acute and cancer pain, and many people with CNCP benefit from opioids.31 Continued focus and policy responses based on findings from a small group of people with increased risk of harms run the risk of limiting access to people who safely derive objective benefits from opioids."


Original Investigation Pharmacy and Clinical Pharmacology

August 10, 2023

Five-Year Trajectories of Prescription Opioid Use

Natasa Gisev, PhD1; Luke Buizen, MBiostat1; Ria E. Hopkins, MPH1; et alAndrea L. Schaffer, PhD2,3; Benjamin Daniels, PhD4; Chrianna Bharat, PhD1; Timothy Dobbins, PhD4; Sarah Larney, PhD5; Fiona Blyth, PhD6; David C. Currow, PhD7; Andrew Wilson, PhD8; Sallie-Anne Pearson, PhD4,8; Louisa Degenhardt, PhD1
Author Affiliations Article Information
JAMA Netw Open. 2023;6(8):e2328159. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.28159

Key Points
Question What are the 5-year trajectories of opioid use following initiation, and what are the characteristics of different trajectory groups?

Findings In this population-based cohort study of 3.47 million adults, 5 trajectories of opioid use were identified. Approximately 3% of individuals were classified to the sustained use trajectory group, which was characterized by individuals with older age, a higher number of comorbidities, and higher use of psychotropic and other analgesic drugs and health services vs other trajectory groups.

Meaning Findings from this study suggest that, although most individuals who commenced prescription opioid treatment had low, time-limited exposure to opioids, the small proportion of adults with sustained or increasing opioid use had greater clinical complexity and treatment needs.

Abstract
Importance There are known risks of using opioids for extended periods. However, less is known about the long-term trajectories of opioid use following initiation.

Objective To identify 5-year trajectories of prescription opioid use, and to examine the characteristics of each trajectory group.

Design, Setting, and Participants This population-based cohort study conducted in New South Wales, Australia, linked national pharmaceutical claims data to 10 national and state data sets to determine sociodemographic characteristics, clinical characteristics, drug use, and health services use. The cohort included adult residents (aged ≥18 years) of New South Wales who initiated a prescription opioid between July 1, 2003, and December 31, 2018. Statistical analyses were conducted from February to September 2022.

Exposure Dispensing of a prescription opioid, with no evidence of opioid dispensing in the preceding 365 days, identified from pharmaceutical claims data.

Main Outcomes and Measures The main outcome was the trajectories of monthly opioid use over 60 months from opioid initiation. Group-based trajectory modeling was used to classify these trajectories. Linked health care data sets were used to examine characteristics of individuals in different trajectory groups.

Results Among 3 474 490 individuals who initiated a prescription opioid (1 831 230 females [52.7%]; mean [SD] age, 49.7 [19.3] years), 5 trajectories of long-term opioid use were identified: very low use (75.4%), low use (16.6%), moderate decreasing to low use (2.6%), low increasing to moderate use (2.6%), and sustained use (2.8%). Compared with individuals in the very low use trajectory group, those in the sustained use trajectory group were older (age ≥65 years: 22.0% vs 58.4%); had more comorbidities, including cancer (4.1% vs 22.2%); had increased health services contact, including hospital admissions (36.9% vs 51.6%); had higher use of psychotropic (16.4% vs 42.4%) and other analgesic drugs (22.9% vs 47.3%) prior to opioid initiation, and were initiated on stronger opioids (20.0% vs 50.2%).

Conclusions and relevance Results of this cohort study suggest that most individuals commencing treatment with prescription opioids had relatively low and time-limited exposure to opioids over a 5-year period. The small proportion of individuals with sustained or increasing use was older with more comorbidities and use of psychotropic and other analgesic drugs, likely reflecting a higher prevalence of pain and treatment needs in these individuals.

Without reading the entire study I can point out some glaring flaws. First off the study is out of Australia and comparing that to the US population is like apples to oranges. The US l has a far greater prevalence of substance abuse compared to Australia. Second, is this study comparing all comers here? Post op acute pain scripts? What opiate? Any correlation between MEQ dispensed and long-term risk of use? This study should certainly not be used to justify liberal prescribing of opiates. Clearly the abundance of evidence from the past 20+ years shows that liberal opiate prescribing can cause immeasurable harm and little benefit beyond treating a very small subset of the population who may or may not actually benefit.
 
Without reading the entire study I can point out some glaring flaws. First off the study is out of Australia and comparing that to the US population is like apples to oranges. The US l has a far greater prevalence of substance abuse compared to Australia. Second, is this study comparing all comers here? Post op acute pain scripts? What opiate? Any correlation between MEQ dispensed and long-term risk of use? This study should certainly not be used to justify liberal prescribing of opiates. Clearly the abundance of evidence from the past 20+ years shows that liberal opiate prescribing can cause immeasurable harm and little benefit beyond treating a very small subset of the population who may or may not actually benefit.
Because we’ve been arguing about “person versus pill” on this forum for 15 years. The pill does not know what country it’s in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Because we’ve been arguing about “person versus pill” on this forum for 15 years. The pill does not know what country it’s in.

The reaction to the pill is vastly different based on genetics, upbringing and society.
 
I guess you could say, "I told you so."


"Overall, these findings suggest that most people who initiate an opioid prescription are likely to have low, time-limited exposure to opioids with little indication of ongoing use. This possibility is an important consideration for policymakers and stakeholders considering population-level prescribing of high-risk drugs. Opioids are essential drugs for acute and cancer pain, and many people with CNCP benefit from opioids.31 Continued focus and policy responses based on findings from a small group of people with increased risk of harms run the risk of limiting access to people who safely derive objective benefits from opioids."


Original Investigation Pharmacy and Clinical Pharmacology

August 10, 2023

Five-Year Trajectories of Prescription Opioid Use

Natasa Gisev, PhD1; Luke Buizen, MBiostat1; Ria E. Hopkins, MPH1; et alAndrea L. Schaffer, PhD2,3; Benjamin Daniels, PhD4; Chrianna Bharat, PhD1; Timothy Dobbins, PhD4; Sarah Larney, PhD5; Fiona Blyth, PhD6; David C. Currow, PhD7; Andrew Wilson, PhD8; Sallie-Anne Pearson, PhD4,8; Louisa Degenhardt, PhD1
Author Affiliations Article Information
JAMA Netw Open. 2023;6(8):e2328159. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.28159

Key Points
Question What are the 5-year trajectories of opioid use following initiation, and what are the characteristics of different trajectory groups?

Findings In this population-based cohort study of 3.47 million adults, 5 trajectories of opioid use were identified. Approximately 3% of individuals were classified to the sustained use trajectory group, which was characterized by individuals with older age, a higher number of comorbidities, and higher use of psychotropic and other analgesic drugs and health services vs other trajectory groups.

Meaning Findings from this study suggest that, although most individuals who commenced prescription opioid treatment had low, time-limited exposure to opioids, the small proportion of adults with sustained or increasing opioid use had greater clinical complexity and treatment needs.

Abstract
Importance There are known risks of using opioids for extended periods. However, less is known about the long-term trajectories of opioid use following initiation.

Objective To identify 5-year trajectories of prescription opioid use, and to examine the characteristics of each trajectory group.

Design, Setting, and Participants This population-based cohort study conducted in New South Wales, Australia, linked national pharmaceutical claims data to 10 national and state data sets to determine sociodemographic characteristics, clinical characteristics, drug use, and health services use. The cohort included adult residents (aged ≥18 years) of New South Wales who initiated a prescription opioid between July 1, 2003, and December 31, 2018. Statistical analyses were conducted from February to September 2022.

Exposure Dispensing of a prescription opioid, with no evidence of opioid dispensing in the preceding 365 days, identified from pharmaceutical claims data.

Main Outcomes and Measures The main outcome was the trajectories of monthly opioid use over 60 months from opioid initiation. Group-based trajectory modeling was used to classify these trajectories. Linked health care data sets were used to examine characteristics of individuals in different trajectory groups.

Results Among 3 474 490 individuals who initiated a prescription opioid (1 831 230 females [52.7%]; mean [SD] age, 49.7 [19.3] years), 5 trajectories of long-term opioid use were identified: very low use (75.4%), low use (16.6%), moderate decreasing to low use (2.6%), low increasing to moderate use (2.6%), and sustained use (2.8%). Compared with individuals in the very low use trajectory group, those in the sustained use trajectory group were older (age ≥65 years: 22.0% vs 58.4%); had more comorbidities, including cancer (4.1% vs 22.2%); had increased health services contact, including hospital admissions (36.9% vs 51.6%); had higher use of psychotropic (16.4% vs 42.4%) and other analgesic drugs (22.9% vs 47.3%) prior to opioid initiation, and were initiated on stronger opioids (20.0% vs 50.2%).

Conclusions and relevance Results of this cohort study suggest that most individuals commencing treatment with prescription opioids had relatively low and time-limited exposure to opioids over a 5-year period. The small proportion of individuals with sustained or increasing use was older with more comorbidities and use of psychotropic and other analgesic drugs, likely reflecting a higher prevalence of pain and treatment needs in these individuals.

Authors: 11 PhDs, 1 MPH, 1 Biostatician. No physicians.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
For those of you who have ever been injured or had surgery and got hydrocodone/oxycodone, didn’t you take your pain meds and think “I don’t see what the fuss is about”

Surgery pain felt a little better, constipation was horrendous, I threw the rest of the oxycodone away. I think most people fall into that category.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 users
Anyone else notice many patients having difficulty filling monthly scripts because their medication is often out of stock? Over the past year or two.


We hear alot about CDC Guidelines, etc. Less about things like this.
 
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: 2 users
Anyone else notice many patients having difficulty filling monthly scripts because their medication is often out of stock? Over the past year or two.


We hear alot about CDC Guidelines, etc. Less about things like this.
Yes to supply shortages. I have loosened the enforcement of the part of our opioid agreement that insists on using one pharmacy only because of this. Multiple times per month I get calls that pharmacy is out of stock of hydrocodone, can we send it to this other cvs etc? Have also seen specific shortages of Norco 5/325 and have given some pts prescriptions for 10/325, 1/2 pill. These issues are completely out of pt's hands, have nothing to do w/ their compliance, so I help them in these circumstances. It's becoming more frequent, though, for sure.
 
For those of you who have ever been injured or had surgery and got hydrocodone/oxycodone, didn’t you take your pain meds and think “I don’t see what the fuss is about”

Surgery pain felt a little better, constipation was horrendous, I threw the rest of the oxycodone away. I think most people fall into that category.
I haven't had an opioid since Vicodin for an ortho surgery when I was in high school. Made me so violently nauseated that I dealt w/ the pain rather than take it.
 
Anyone else notice many patients having difficulty filling monthly scripts because their medication is often out of stock? Over the past year or two.


We hear alot about CDC Guidelines, etc. Less about things like this.

ahh a nice shoutout to Dr. Bockoff, a "pain expert" from Beverly Hills.
recently saw a patient of his who was on oxycontin 30mg tid and oxycodone 40mg tid prn for back pain
 
  • Wow
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
For those of you who have ever been injured or had surgery and got hydrocodone/oxycodone, didn’t you take your pain meds and think “I don’t see what the fuss is about”

Surgery pain felt a little better, constipation was horrendous, I threw the rest of the oxycodone away. I think most people fall into that category.

yep. I didn't really feel pain meds were that helpful. usually take 1-2 tabs and then stop. side effects exceeded benefit
 
ahh a nice shoutout to Dr. Bockoff, a "pain expert" from Beverly Hills.
recently saw a patient of his who was on oxycontin 30mg tid and oxycodone 40mg tid prn for back pain

but was he bad enough to lose his medical license? couldn't an argument be made that we need to have some docs willing to take care of these refugees? It sounds like the dea admin personally got involved in his case, and admin with no medical background.
 
Top