Cost and Comorbidities Associated with Opioid Abuse in Managed Care and Medicaid Patients in the United States: A Comparison of Two Recently Published Studies

ABSTRACT

Opioid abuse places a large burden on the U.S. society. Two similarly designed studies recently identified the economic and health impact of opioid abuse in patients with private or Medicaid insurance. The prevalence of opioid abuse was estimated to be over 10 times higher in Medicaid beneficiaries than private insurance populations, 87 versus 8 per 10,000, respectively. Opioid abusers incurred annual medical costs that were $14,054 to $6650 higher than nonabusers in patients with private insurance or Medicaid beneficiaries, respectively (P < .01 for both). Annual costs were similar for abusers with private insurance ($15,884) or Medicaid beneficiaries ($13,658). Costs for nonabuser Medicaid beneficiaries were $7008 versus $1830 for those with private insurance, which likely reflects the lower health status of the overall Medicaid population. In both studies, the prevalence of comorbidities associated with substance abuse or chronic pain were significantly higher in abusers than nonabusers. These studies confirm that opioid abuse is associated with comorbidities that increase direct medical costs for patients with private insurance and for Medicaid beneficiaries, increasing the societal burden of opioid abuse.     

Chronic Pain: Reducing Costs Through Early Implementation of Adherence Testing and Recognition of Opioid Misuse

Abstract

Objective: To review the literature on costs associated with chronic pain therapy and to identify key contributing factors. Also, to assess the potential cost-saving benefits of monitoring pain treatment adherence using urine drug tests (UDTs), emphasizing their use in opioid therapy. Results: Reduced productivity, compensation costs, and treatment of comorbid conditions related to chronic pain contribute to the substantial financial burden of chronic pain management in the United States. The growing use of opioids for chronic pain increases the risk for drug nonadherence and associated drug abuse, potential addiction, and aberrant drug-related behaviors (ADRBs). Treatment of drug abuse increases health care costs; opioid abusers are 25 times more likely to require hospitalization than nonopioid abusers. Early detection of patient nonadherence using UDTs could significantly reduce costs of chronic pain therapy by allowing the physician to identify and treat patients' ADRBs related to controlled substances and drug addiction and abuse problems. Adherence in chronic pain may be determined by point-of-care (POC) tests, and more sensitive laboratory urine tests employing gas chromatography/mass spectrometry with high-performance liquid chromatography tests (LUTs). Cost-benefit studies suggest that the cost of LUTs to optimize adherence may reduce costs associated with nonadherence, such as inpatient clinical care and patient self-release. Current estimates indicate that appropriate use of LUTs could produce decreases up to 14.8-fold in the cost of chronic pain therapy. Conclusions: The cost benefits of UDTs can only be fully realized if physicians know how to define and detect various types of drug abuse, addiction, and diversion. Physicians should be educated on the proper implementation of POC tests and LUTs, and interpretation of adherence data. Early monitoring of drug adherence using POC tests and follow-up LUTs may provide substantial cost savings associated with health care issues incurred in nonadherent chronic pain patients, especially those taking opioid therapy.     

Variable Use of Opioid Pharmacotherapy for Chronic Noncancer Pain in Europe: Causes and Consequences

ABSTRACT.?

According to the 2005 Pain in Europe Survey, the use of opioids to treat patients with chronic noncancer pain varies considerably among different countries in Europe. Undertreatment of chronic pain is common. This review examines the possible causes and consequences of limiting opioid availability to these patients. The causes of inadequate opioid use include medical, ethical, and cultural factors that influence prescribing decisions; legislative and health care system controls that serve to restrict the use of opioids for long-term treatment of non–cancer-related pain conditions; and poor treatment acceptance by patients. The validity of these restrictions is discussed in relation to the need to protect patients and society from harm due to adverse events, and the potential for misuse and abuse with prescribed opioids. This is balanced against the therapeutic goal of providing the best available pain-relieving treatment and to avoid the consequences of unnecessary suffering in patients with chronic noncancer pain.     

Traumatic Brain Injury and Receipt of Prescription Opioid Therapy for Chronic Pain in Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans: Do Clinical Practice Guidelines Matter?

Clinical practice guidelines admonish against prescribing opioids for individuals with chronic pain and traumatic brain injury (TBI) because of increased risk for adverse outcomes, yet no studies have described opioid prescribing patterns in these higher-risk patients. Between October 2007 and March 2015, 53,124 Iraq and Afghanistan veterans with chronic pain not prescribed opioids in the previous year were followed for 1 year after completing a Comprehensive TBI Evaluation within the Department of Veterans Affairs health care facilities. Veterans reporting the most severe TBI sequelae (eg, loss of consciousness?>30 minutes) were significantly more likely to receive short-term and long-term opioid therapy than those with less severe or no TBI sequelae (P values?<?.001). In analyses adjusted for sociodemographic characteristics, military service, pain disability, and previous nonopioid treatment modalities, veterans with moderate to severe TBI had a significantly increased risk of receiving opioid therapy. Veterans with moderate to severe TBI and comorbid post-traumatic stress disorder and depression had an even greater risk of initiating long-term opioid therapy in the year after the Comprehensive TBI Evaluation (adjusted relative risk?=?3.57 [95% confidence interval?=?2.85–4.47]). Higher-risk patients with chronic pain and TBI with mental health comorbidities may benefit from improved access to behavioral health and nonpharmacological therapies for chronic pain.

Improving Family Medicine Residents’ Opioid Prescribing: A Nurse Practitioner-Led Model

Academic family medicine teaching centers face distinct challenges with opioid prescribing, including higher rates of opioid misuse in resident patient populations and lower levels of experience managing chronic noncancer pain. To improve opioid prescribing practices in an academic family practice, we introduced and evaluated a nurse practitioner-led collaborative care model. After implementation of the model, we found a reduction in the average dose of opioids prescribed, increased use of urine drug tests and opioid treatment agreements, and fewer prescribers per patient. The nurse practitioner-led model was successfully implemented in an academic family practice with improvements in opioid prescribing and monitoring practices.     

A Conceptual Framework for Understanding Unintended Prolonged Opioid Use

An urgent need exists to better understand the transition from short-term opioid use to unintended prolonged opioid use (UPOU). The purpose of this work is to propose a conceptual framework for understanding UPOU that posits the influence of 3 principal domains that include the characteristics of (1) individual patients, (2) the practice environment, and (3) opioid prescribers. Although no standardized method exists for developing a conceptual framework, the process often involves identifying corroborative evidence, leveraging expert opinion to identify factors for inclusion in the framework, and developing a graphic depiction of the relationships between the various factors and the clinical problem of interest. Key patient characteristics potentially associated with UPOU include (1) medical and mental health conditions; (2) pain etiology; (3) individual affective, behavioral, and neurophysiologic reactions to pain and opioids; and (4) sociodemographic factors. Also, UPOU could be influenced by structural and health care policy factors: (1) the practice environment, including the roles of prescribing clinicians, adoption of relevant practice guidelines, and clinician incentives or disincentives, and (2) the regulatory environment. Finally, characteristics inherent to clinicians that could influence prescribing practices include (1) training in pain management and opioid use; (2) personal attitudes, knowledge, and beliefs regarding the risks and benefits of opioids; and (3) professionalism. As the gatekeeper to opioid access, the behavior of prescribing clinicians directly mediates UPOU, with the 3 domains interacting to determine this behavior. This proposed conceptual framework could guide future research on the topic and allow plausible hypothesis-based interventions to reduce UPOU.     

Coadministration of an Opioid Agonist and Antagonist for Pain Control

Abstract: The increased use of opioids in the treatment of chronic pain encourages the search for drugs with low abuse and tolerance potential but with potent analgesic activity. Opioid agonist‐antagonists and partial agonists have less abuse potential than do mu opioid receptor agonists such as morphine, and have been used for many years for their analgesic affects. Recently they have been approved for treatment of opioid addiction. As a guard against abuse, an opioid antagonist, such as naloxone, is added to some opioid formulations. Doctors are often hesitant to prescribe agonist‐antagonists and partial agonists to opioid‐tolerant patients, fearing that these drugs may precipitate withdrawal. Can drugs being used safely for addiction treatment also safely replace opioid agonists to provide analgesia in chronic pain patients who are opioid‐tolerant?     

Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain

Improving the way opioids are prescribed through clinical practice guidelines can ensure patients have access to safer, more effective chronic pain treatment while reducing the number of people who misuse, abuse, or overdose from these drugs. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) developed and published the Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain to provide recommendations for the prescribing of opioid pain medication for patients 18 and older in primary care settings. Recommendations focus on the use of opioids in treating chronic pain (pain lasting longer than 3 months or past the time of normal tissue healing) outside of active cancer treatment, palliative care, and end-of-life care.     

Treatment Considerations for Cancer Pain: A Global Perspective

Cancer pain is prevalent, undertreated, and feared by patients with cancer. In April 2013, a panel of pain experts convened in Singapore to address the treatment of cancer pain. They discussed the various types of cancer pain, including breakthrough pain, which is sometimes clinically confused with analgesic gaps. Reasons for undertreating cancer pain include attitudes of patients, clinicians, and factors associated with healthcare systems. The consequences of not treating cancer pain may include reduced quality of life for patients with cancer (who now live longer than ever), functional decline, and increased psychological stress. Early analgesic intervention for cancer pain may reduce the risk of central sensitization and chronification of pain. To manage pain in oncology patients, clinicians should assess pain during regular follow‐up visits using validated pain measurement tools and follow prescribing guidelines, if necessary referring patients with cancer to pain specialists. Many patients with cancer require opioids for pain relief. Pain associated with cancer may also relate to cancer treatments, such as chemotherapy‐induced peripheral neuropathy. Many patients with cancer are what might be considered “special populations,” in that they may be elderly, frail, comorbid, or have end‐stage organ failure. Specific pain therapy guidelines for those populations are reviewed. Patients with cancer with a history of or active substance abuse disorder deserve pain control but may require close medical supervision. While much “treatment inertia” exists in cancer pain control, cancer pain can be safely and effectively managed and should be carried out to alleviate suffering and improve outcomes.     

Eight principles for safer opioid prescribing and cautions with benzodiazepines

The provision of long-term opioid analgesic therapy for chronic pain requires a careful risk/benefit analysis followed by clinical safety measures to identify and reduce misuse, abuse, and addiction and their associated morbidity and mortality. Multiple data sources show that benzodiazepines, prescribed for comorbid insomnia, anxiety, and mood disorders, heighten the risk of respiratory depression and other adverse outcomes when combined with opioid therapy. Evidence is presented for hazards associated with coadministration of opioids and benzodiazepines and the need for caution when initiating opioid therapy for chronic pain. Clinical recommendations follow, as drawn from 2 previously published literature reviews, one of which proffers 8 principles for safer opioid prescribing; the other review presents risks associated with benzodiazepines, suggests alternatives for co-prescribing benzodiazepines and opioids, and outlines recommendations regarding co-prescribing if alternative therapies are ineffective.     

Who Will Prescribe? A Proposal for Specialized Opioid Management Clinics

Abstract: There is currently no uniform system of providing care for patients with chronic nonmalignant pain who require ongoing opioid maintenance therapy. Some patients receive care in a general practice setting, while others are managed in pain clinics where opioid management is only one of many services provided. Current events involving increased abuse and diversion of opioid medications suggest the need for improved case management and coordination when opioids are used for chronic nonmalignant pain. Based on the model of anticoagulation clinics, the author proposes the development of specialized opioid management clinics. These clinics would: 1) evaluate patient‐specific risks and benefits of therapy; 2) supervise the mechanics of opioid prescribing; 3) provide systematic and secure monitoring of patient adherence to therapy; 4) assess goals of therapy and progress towards them; 5) coordinate opioid treatment with other pain‐related treatment; 6) supply education to patients, family members and caregivers about the appropriate use of opioids; 7) maintain communication with other caregivers and pharmacists; and 8) provide regular psychological assistance and support for patients.     

Opioid-Induced Hyperalgesia: A Diagnostic Dilemma

Opioids are utilized frequently for the treatment of moderate to severe acute pain in the perioperative setting, as well as in the treatment of cancer-related pain. When prescribing chronic opioid therapy to patients with chronic pain, it is crucial for the practitioner to be aware not only of the issues of tolerance and withdrawal, but also to have knowledge of the possibility for opioid-induced hyperalgesia (OIH). An understanding of the differences between tolerance and OIH when escalating opioid therapy allows the titration of opioid as well as nonopioid analgesics in order to obtain maximum control of both chronic and acute pain. A case study is described to highlight the importance of judicious utilization of opioids in the treatment of cancer-related pain. In this case, high-dose opioid therapy did not improve chronic pain and contributed to a hyperalgesic state in which a young man experienced severe intractable pain postoperatively after two routine thoracotomies, despite aggressive pharmacologic measures to manage his perioperative pain. Furthermore, it illustrates the potential advantages of opioid rotation to methadone when OIH is suspected.     

The Role of Urine Drug Testing for Patients on Opioid Therapy

Opioid analgesics must be prescribed with discernment and their appropriate use should be periodically assessed. Urine drug testing, although not designed specifically for this role, is a widely available and familiar method for monitoring opioid use in chronic pain patients. Urine drug testing can help track patient compliance and expose possible drug misuse and abuse. We sought to evaluate current attitudes and practices regarding the use of urine drug testing among chronic pain patients taking opioids. To the best of our knowledge, this is one of the first such attempts in the literature to examine and document the practice patterns of urine drug testing in this context. A total of 99 attendees at the American Congress of Pain Medicine were surveyed in 2008 about their urine testing practices for patients on opioid therapy. Surprisingly, more urine testing was motivated by a desire to detect undisclosed substances than to evaluate appropriate opioid use. Some respondents never urine‐tested their opioid patients, and about two‐thirds of respondents had no formal training in urine testing of patients on opioid therapy. The literature does not thoroughly address the role of urine drug testing in this patient population. Most respondents did random rather than scheduled testing; few had any urine testing protocol. The study found motivations for urine testing and testing practices varied widely, and urine testing, despite its clinical utility, is not used consistently.