Controlled substances and pain management: changes in knowledge and attitudes of state medical regulators

Physicians report that concern about regulatory investigation negatively influences their prescribing of opioid analgesics. The views of medical regulators about the legality of prescribing controlled substances for pain management were studied in 1991. However, little is known about whether these views have changed in light of increased emphasis on pain management and educational programs for state medical boards. Two studies that examined this issue are described. In Study 1, a 1997 survey of state medical board members was compared to results obtained in 1991 to evaluate differences in knowledge and perceptions about opioid analgesics. Important changes were observed over time, particularly regarding characteristics of "addiction" and the legality of prolonged prescribing of opioids. For Study 2, a longitudinal survey was conducted of medical board members who participated in five workshops about pain management and regulatory policy. Results revealed significant and sustained changes in attitudes about the incidence of iatrogenic addiction when using opioids to treat pain, the analgesic and side-effect properties of opioids, and the perceived legality of prescribing opioids. Recommendations for reducing concerns about regulatory scrutiny are presented, including the need for a more intensive education program, increasing the rate of adoption of new state medical board policies, and improving communication between regulators and clinicians.     

Pain management, controlled substances, and state medical board policy: a decade of change

Physicians' concerns about regulatory scrutiny and the possibility of unwarranted investigation by regulatory agencies negatively affect their prescribing of opioid analgesics to treat pain. Indeed, some state medical boards have rejected prescribing practices that are considered acceptable by today's standards. This article describes a ten-year program of research, education, and policy development implemented by the Pain & Policy Studies Group aimed at updating and clarifying state medical board policies on the use of opioid analgesics to treat pain, including cancer and chronic noncancer pain. Following surveys of medical board members and educational workshops, state medical board policies began an initial period of change, drawing on guidelines from other states, particularly in California. The next phase of policy development was marked by the introduction of Model Guidelines by the Federation of State Medical Boards of the U.S. The Model Guidelines address professional standards for the appropriate prescribing of opioid analgesics for pain management, as well as physicians' fears of regulatory scrutiny. Although most state medical boards have adopted regulations, guidelines, or policy statements relating to controlled substances and pain management, to date ten boards have adopted the Model Guidelines, while ten more have adopted the Model Guidelines in part. Further actions are recommended so that state medical boards can address inadequate pain management and physician concerns about regulatory scrutiny.     

Model policy for the use of controlled substances for the treatment of pain

The Federation of State Medical Boards of the United States published Model Guideline for the Use of Controlled Substances in the Management of Pain in 1998 and expanded it to this Model Policy in October 2004. The Model Policy is designed to communicate to licensees that the state medical board views pain management to be important and integral to the practice of medicine; that opioid analgesics may be necessary for the relief of pain; that the use of opioids for other than legitimate medical purposes poses a threat to the individual and society; that physicians have a responsibility to minimize the potential for the abuse and diversion of controlled substances; and that physicians will not be sanctioned solely for prescribing opioid analgesics for legitimate medical purposes.     

Model Policy for the Use of Controlled Substances for the Treatment of Pain

The Federation of State Medical Boards of the United States published Model Guidelines for die Use of Controlled Substances in die Management of Pain in 1998 and expanded it to this Model Policy in October 2004. The Model Policy is designed to communicate to licensees that the state medical board views pain management to be important and integral to die practice of medicine; mat opioid analgesics may be necessary for die relief of pain; mat the use of opioids for odier than legitimate medical purposes poses a direat to die individual and society; that physicians have a responsibility to minimize the potential for die abuse and diversion of controlled substances; and that physicians will not be sanctioned solely for prescribing opioid analgesics for legitimate medical purposes.     

Opioids,Chronic Pain,and Addiction in Primary Care

Research has largely ignored the systematic examination of physicians' attitudes towards providing care for patients with chronic noncancer pain. The objective of this study was to identify barriers and facilitators to opioid treatment of chronic noncancer pain patients by office-based medical providers. We used a qualitative study design using individual and group interviews. Participants were 23 office-based physicians in New England. Interviews were audiotaped, transcribed, and systematically coded by a multidisciplinary team using the constant comparative method. Physician barriers included absence of objective or physiological measures of pain; lack of expertise in the treatment of chronic pain and coexisting disorders, including addiction; lack of interest in pain management; patients' aberrant behaviors; and physicians' attitudes toward prescribing opioid analgesics. Physician facilitators included promoting continuity of patient care and the use of opioid agreements. Physicians' perceptions of patient-related barriers included lack of physician responsiveness to patients' pain reports, negative attitudes toward opioid analgesics, concerns about cost, and patients' low motivation for pain treatment. Perceived logistical barriers included lack of appropriate pain management and addiction referral options, limited information regarding diagnostic workup, limited insurance coverage for pain management services, limited ancillary support for physicians, and insufficient time. Addressing these barriers to pain treatment will be crucial to improving pain management service delivery.     

Current status of pain management in China: an overview

China is a large country with a huge population.It is estimated that 1.8 million patients suffer initially from cancer and 1.4 million patients die from it each year in Mainland China. Cancer ranks as the primary reason for death among the common diseases in cities and the second in rural areas.The management of pain is still a critical issue in the care of patients both with cancer and non-cancer pain. A national survey suggested that the fear of addicting patients was still a major barrier for medical professionals in prescribing opioid analgesics. The major reasons for poor management or negative factors of pain relief came from patients' own reasons including their over-concern about addiction to opioid analgesics, their reluctance to report pain and their resistance to use opioid analgesics. Oral long-acting opioids are the most commonly used drugs for third ladder pain management. With policy support from the government, the consumption of morphine for medical purposes has increased significantly for the first time in recent Chinese history as this new cancer pain relief policy has been developed in the country. As a result, the three-step analgesic ladder of the World Health Organization (WHO) has been gradually accepted by medical personnel and patients.Although pain management has been improved since the WHO's strategy of the three-step approach was implemented in China, variations still exist in different regions of the Mainland. Currently the three main aspects of work on pain measurement are going to be undertaken including (1) continuous support from government policy; (2) consistent education and training; and (3) better availability of drugs for medical use throughout the whole country.     

Physician attitudes toward opioid prescribing for patients with persistent noncancer pain

OBJECTIVES: Physicians frequently express dissatisfaction about caring for patients with chronic pain and frequently report that inadequate training and concern about addiction are impediments to prescribing opioids. Elderly patients with chronic pain may be at increased risk of experiencing uncontrolled pain and this patient population is increasingly being cared for by geriatricians rather than internists. We sought to determine if there is a differential impact on internists and geriatricians of the factors that adversely affect attitudes toward opioid prescribing. METHODS: Anonymous survey of geriatric and internal medicine physicians at a large urban academic medical center about their beliefs and behaviors regarding opioid prescribing. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-two of 187 physicians completed the survey for an overall response rate of 71%. Controlling for level of training, internists were more likely to be concerned about illegal diversion (adjusted odds ratio=10.0, P=0.004), were more concerned about causing addiction (38% vs. 0%, P<0.001), and were more likely to be concerned about their inability to prescribe the correct opioid dose (adjusted odds ratio=11.1, P=0.020). DISCUSSION: Factors shown to have an adverse affect on opioid prescribing disproportionately impact on the attitudes of internists compared with geriatricians. Further research is needed to determine if there is also a differential impact on how internists care for their elderly patients with chronic pain.     

Medical students' attitudes toward pain and the use of opioid analgesics: implications for changing medical school curriculum

BACKGROUND: Barriers to pain management include physicians' lack of knowledge and attitudes. Our aim was to investigate future physicians' knowledge and attitudes toward pain and the use of opioid analgesics. METHODS: We tested a medical school class during their freshman and senior years. Stepwise regression analysis was used to identify the personal traits that predicted opiophobia. RESULTS: The professionalization process of medical training may reinforce negative attitudes. Psychologic characteristics were associated with reluctance to prescribe opioids, and fears of patient addiction and drug regulatory agency sanctions. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent attitudes were found in senior medical students with preferences for certain specialty areas and the practitioners of their future specialties, suggesting a "preselection" effect. Higher scores on reliance on high technology, external locus of control, and intolerance of clinical uncertainty were associated with higher scores on one or more of the three dimensions of opiophobia. Implications for medical education are discussed.     

Physicians' knowledge and attitudes toward the use of analgesics for cancer pain management: a survey of two medical centers in Taiwan

The purposes of this study were to examine the attitudes of physicians regarding the optimal use of analgesics for cancer pain management (CPM), to evaluate their knowledge and attitudes toward opioid prescribing, and to comprehend their perceptions of the barriers to optimal CPM. A survey was conducted on 356 physicians with cancer patient care responsibilities practicing in two medical centers in Taiwan. A total of 204 (57%) physicians responded, including internists (28%), surgeons (27%), oncologists (11%), anesthesiologists (10%), and other specialties (24%). The majority of physicians displayed significantly inadequate knowledge and negative attitudes toward the optimal use of analgesics and opioid prescribing. Multivariate analyses showed that the following six categories of physicians would be inclined to have inadequate knowledge of opioid prescribing: 1) those with perception of good medical school training in CPM, 2) those with perception of poor residency or fellowship training in CPM, 3) those with a medical specialty in surgery, medicine, or oncology (vs. anesthesiology), 4) those with limited clinical experience in cancer patient care (number of patients less than 30), 5) those with a limited aim of pain relief, and 6) those with an underestimation of analgesic effect. Additionally, physicians with inadequate knowledge of opioid prescribing and with hesitation to intervene earlier with maximal dose of analgesia would be inclined to have reluctant attitudes toward opioid prescribing. The most important barriers to optimal CPM identified by physicians themselves were physician-related problems, such as inadequate guidance from a pain specialist, inadequate knowledge of CPM, and inadequate pain assessment. The results of this study suggest that active analgesic education programs are urgently needed in Taiwan.     

Exploring beliefs and practice of opioid prescribing for persistent non-cancer pain by general practitioners.

Persistent non-cancer pain is a common reason for consultation in primary care but treatment options, including non-opioid analgesics, are limited, and neither strong evidence nor established guidelines address when and how primary care doctors should prescribe opioid analgesics for persistent non-cancer pain. The aim of this study was to investigate associations between doctors' prescribing patterns for persistent non-cancer pain in primary care and their personal and practice characteristics and beliefs about appropriateness and risks of opioids. A pilot survey sampled beliefs concerning the need for and risks of opioid prescribing for persistent non-cancer pain among volunteers from primary care practices and postgraduate educational events, using a self-report questionnaire, and related these beliefs to their reported opioid prescribing. One quarter of the sample prescribed no opioids for persistent non-cancer pain. Prescribing opioids was predicted by moderate belief in the appropriateness of opioids within certain constraints, and to a lesser extent by younger age. While some beliefs distinguished prescribers from non-prescribers, predicting non-prescribing was poor. Both prescribers and non-prescribers expressed concern about the risks of opioids. In addition, most primary care doctors were dissatisfied with their training on pain; few had prescribing guidelines; and neither training nor guidelines influenced prescribing. In conclusion, whether or not GPs prescribe opioids for persistent non-cancer pain is mainly determined by their personal beliefs about appropriateness of opioids for this problem.     

Special aspects of cancer pain management in a Chinese general hospital

China is still faced with a challenge in cancer pain management. The purposes of this study are to assess the current status of cancer pain management, and physicians' attitudes in China towards cancer pain management. The survey was done in a Chinese general hospital; 427 physicians and 387 cancer pain patients participated. The survey consisted of questionnaires to evaluate cancer pain management and physicians' knowledge of, and attitudes towards, cancer pain management. A total of 43% of patients with cancer pain and 51% with bone pain felt that they had been inadequately treated. The physicians rated the main reason for not using opioid drugs as the strong and difficult to control side-effects. The four main barriers to optimal management of cancer pain were: inadequate pain assessment; excessive state regulation of the prescribing of opioids; inadequate staff knowledge of pain management; and lack of access to powerful analgesics. To conclude: In China, there are some special aspects of cancer pain management, including physicians' concern about using opioid drugs, fear of being unable to manage adverse effects of opioids, and inadequately treated bone pain.     

Legal aspects of chronic opioid therapy

Although many Americans suffer from undertreated pain, the regulatory and legal environment for the use of opioids in pain relief is currently in a state of flux. The federal government’s efforts to curb drug abuse have complicated the use of opioids for pain relief. Recent actions by the US Drug Enforcement Agency have added to an atmosphere of mistrust and confusion and have increased physician concerns about increased scrutiny and legal, regulatory, or administrative sanctions. Despite a disturbing shift in regulatory authority over opioid analgesics away from health agencies and toward law enforcement agencies, recent state policies and guidelines from national medical organizations are playing an important role in promoting the use of opioids for pain treatment and helping to reduce practitioners’ concerns over regulatory oversight. Current and future trends concerning the legal and regulatory aspects of chronic opioid treatment are discussed in this article.     

Pain and addiction: an urgent need for change in nursing education.

Lack of education of health care professionals, including nurses, is frequently cited as a major reason for undertreatment of patients with pain. A reason for undertreatment of pain with opioid analgesics is the irrational fear of creating opioid addiction. To characterize the information nurses receive in their basic education that could contribute to misinformation about this issue, the authors reviewed 14 nursing textbooks, published since 1985, including 8 pharmacology texts and 6 medical surgical texts. An analysis of content revealed that only one textbook correctly stated the definition of opioid addiction and its likelihood following use of opioid analgesics for pain control. Almost all of the texts used confusing terminology, and some erroneously promoted the fear of addiction when opioids are used for pain relief. A simple solution to this problem is to encourage nursing educators to use the American Pain Society publication "Guidelines for Analgesic Use" until textbooks have the opportunity to incorporate correct information.     

Safe use of opioids in chronic noncancer pain

Many physicians avoid prescribing opioid analgesics for chronic pain because of misconceptions or fears about efficacy, adverse effects, abuse, and addiction potential. We discuss these issues and offer suggestions for the rational use of opioid analgesics in patients with chronic noncancer pain.     

Opioid treatment of chronic pain in patients with addiction

Patients with a history of drug or alcohol addiction may present to physicians with pain complaints. The medical literature is weak on the treatment of pain with opioids in patients in recovery or active addiction. This is because inconsistent criteria were used to define addiction and the types of chronic pain. There are clear differences between physical dependence, tolerance, and addiction. Addiction is different from pseudoaddiction and must be determined by the patient's behavior after appropriate pain management. Long-acting opioids are often the medications of choice for moderate to severe pain control. Short-acting opioids can be used for breakthrough pain. There are many other medications that can enhance pain control as adjunctive analgesics. Drug-seeking behavior may be seen with either active addiction or pseudoaddiction, or as part of deviant behavior such as drug diversion. A way to distinguish between these conditions is by giving the patient appropriate pain medication and observing the pattern of behavior to determine which is causing the drug-seeking behavior. Safe prescribing of medications with abuse potential includes use of a medication agreement, setting goals with the patient, giving appropriate amounts of pain medication, monitoring with pill counts and drug screens, and careful documentation. Even patients with a history of addiction can benefit from opioid pain medications if monitored appropriately.     

Opioid dependence and addiction during opioid treatment of chronic pain

Throughout the long history of opioid drug use by humans, it has been known that opioids are powerful analgesics, but they can cause addiction. It has also been observed, and is now substantiated by multiple reports and studies, that during opioid treatment of severe and short-term pain, addiction arises only rarely. However, when opioids are extended to patients with chronic pain, and therapeutic opioid use is not confined to patients with severe and short-lived pain, compulsive opioid seeking and addiction arising directly from opioid treatment of pain become more visible. Although the epidemiological evidence base currently available is rudimentary, it appears that problematic opioid use arises in some fraction of opioid-treated chronic pain patients, and that problematic behaviors and addiction are problems that need to be addressed. Since the potentially devastating effects of addiction can substantially offset the benefits of opioid pain relief, it seems timely to reexamine addiction mechanisms and their relevance to the practice of long-term opioid treatment for pain. This article reviews the neurobiological and genetic basis of addiction, its terminology and diagnosis, the evidence on addiction rates during opioid treatment of chronic pain and the implications of biological mechanisms in formulating rational opioid treatment regimes.