opioid

Importance: Opioid use disorder (OUD) involves compulsive opioid use that causes substantial distress or impairment at work, school, or home. OUD, which is the third most prevalent substance use disorder worldwide, affected an estimated 3.7% of US adults (9 367 000) in 2022 and caused 53 774 deaths in the US in 2024. Medications for opioid use disorder (MOUD) reduce morbidity and mortality. Individuals with OUD also benefit from medications to treat opioid withdrawal and reverse acute opioid overdose.

Observations: Methadone, buprenorphine, and naltrexone are medications approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to reduce unregulated opioid use. Methadone and buprenorphine reduce the risks of overdose and all-cause mortality. However, only 25.1% of people in the US with OUD were treated with these medications in 2022. MOUD should be selected based on shared decision-making that considers availability and convenience of treatment options and patient preferences. Buprenorphine and naltrexone are prescribed in office-based settings and can be taken at home. Outpatients with OUD in the US can only obtain methadone in person at federally regulated clinics. After stopping or substantially reducing use of opioids, individuals with OUD develop symptoms of opioid withdrawal, such as anxiety, insomnia, pain, nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea. Medications for opioid withdrawal include opioid agonists (eg, methadone and buprenorphine), α2-receptor agonists (eg, lofexidine and clonidine), and medications to treat pain (ibuprofen) and nausea (ondansetron). Individuals being treated for acute withdrawal should also be prescribed MOUD to decrease the risk of all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.42-0.63 for MOUD vs no MOUD). Individuals who use opioids may develop opioid overdose, which can cause respiratory depression, stupor, and, if severe, coma and death. Opioid overdose can be treated or can be reversed with naloxone, an opioid antagonist that is FDA approved and should be administered at the lowest dose needed to restore a normal respiratory rate (eg, naloxone 0.4 mg intramuscularly or 2-4 mg intranasally). Community-wide distribution of naloxone to people who use opioids and their social networks has been associated with 25% to 46% lower community opioid overdose rates.

Conclusions and relevance: All individuals with OUD should be offered treatment with MOUD to reduce opioid use. Methadone and buprenorphine decrease opioid-associated and all-cause mortality in patients with OUD. Opioid withdrawal symptoms may be treated with opioid agonists, α2-receptor agonists, and medications for pain and nausea. All individuals with OUD should have access to opioid antagonists, such as naloxone, to treat opioid overdose.

Author/s:

Miriam T H Harris, Zoe M Weinstein, Alexander Y Walley

Management of Opioid Use Disorder

Megan George — Wed, 28 Jan 2026 18:53:33 +0000

Date Added:

January 28, 2026

Journal/Publication:

JAMA

Publication Date:

January 21, 2026

URL:

Management of Opioid Use Disorder

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1001/jama.2025.25464

Keywords

MeSH

opioid-related disorders

Opiates

Addiction

Addiction Disorders

A concise summary of guideline recommendations for helping patients with opioid use disorder. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

View

Opioid use disorder is a chronic disease characterized by a maladaptive pattern of opioid use despite negative consequences. In the US, nearly 75 000 overdose deaths occurred in 2023, a 10-fold increase from 1999.1 However, only 1 in 4 US adults eligible for MOUD received it in 2022.2 The 2024 CRISM guideline outlines evidence-based OUD management that can be implemented by clinicians with or without specialized MOUD training for patients aged 18 years or older.3 It does not address withdrawal induction protocols, scheduling of opioid agonist therapies, or urine drug testing.

Author/s:

Sarah E. Messmer, Molly M. Perri, Andrew M. Davis

What Parents Should Know About Preventing Accidental Poisonings

Megan George — Tue, 28 Oct 2025 15:14:21 +0000

Date Added:

October 28, 2025

Journal/Publication:

JAMA Pediatrics

Publication Date:

October 27, 2025

URL:

What Parents Should Know About Preventing Accidental Poisonings

Type:

Patient Education Materials

Format:

Poster

DOI (1):

10.1001/jamapediatrics.2025.3703

Keywords

Poison

Poison Control

analgesics

Accidental Consumption

PMID (1):

41143820

MeSH

Information for parents about accidental poisonings. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

View

This JAMA Pediatrics Patient Page discusses the most common causes of poisoning in children and safety tips to prevent poisoning.

Author/s:

Mickey A Emmanuel, Ava Mascarenhas, Lindsay A Thompson

Adrenal Insufficiency in Adults: A Review

Megan George — Thu, 28 Aug 2025 18:23:08 +0000

Date Added:

August 28, 2025

Journal/Publication:

JAMA

Publication Date:

August 26, 2025

Issue:

334

Volume:

Pages:

714-725

URL:

Adrenal Insufficiency in Adults: A Review

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1001/jama.2025.5485

Keywords

PMID (1):

40522647

A review of what we know about adrenal insufficiency in adults. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

Importance: Adrenal insufficiency is a syndrome of cortisol deficiency and is categorized as primary, secondary, or glucocorticoid induced. Although primary and secondary adrenal insufficiency are rare, affecting less than 279 per 1 million individuals, glucocorticoid-induced adrenal insufficiency is common.

Observations: Primary adrenal insufficiency, which involves deficiency of all adrenocortical hormones, is caused by autoimmune destruction, congenital adrenal hyperplasia, pharmacological inhibition (eg, high doses of azole antifungal therapy), infection (eg, tuberculosis, fungal infections), or surgical removal of adrenal cortical tissue. Secondary adrenal insufficiency is caused by disorders affecting the pituitary gland, such as tumors, hemorrhage, inflammatory or infiltrative conditions (eg, hypophysitis, sarcoidosis, hemochromatosis), surgery, radiation therapy, or medications that suppress corticotropin production, such as opioids. Glucocorticoid-induced adrenal insufficiency is caused by administration of supraphysiological doses of glucocorticoids. Patients with adrenal insufficiency typically present with nonspecific symptoms, including fatigue (50%-95%), nausea and vomiting (20%-62%), and anorexia and weight loss (43%-73%). Glucocorticoid-induced adrenal insufficiency should be suspected in patients who have recently tapered or discontinued a supraphysiological dose of glucocorticoids. Early-morning (approximately 8 am) measurements of serum cortisol, corticotropin, and dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate (DHEAS) are used to diagnose adrenal insufficiency. Primary adrenal insufficiency is typically characterized by low morning cortisol levels (<5 µg/dL), high corticotropin levels, and low DHEAS levels. Patients with secondary and glucocorticoid-induced adrenal insufficiency typically have low or intermediate morning cortisol levels (5-10 µg/dL) and low or low-normal corticotropin and DHEAS levels. Patients with intermediate early-morning cortisol levels should undergo repeat early-morning cortisol testing or corticotropin stimulation testing (measurement of cortisol before and 60 minutes after administration of cosyntropin, 250 µg). Treatment of adrenal insufficiency involves supplemental glucocorticoids (eg, hydrocortisone, 15-25 mg daily, or prednisone, 3-5 mg daily). Mineralocorticoids (eg, fludrocortisone, 0.05-0.3 mg daily) should be added for patients with primary adrenal insufficiency. Adrenal crisis, a syndrome that can cause hypotension and shock, hyponatremia, altered mental status, and death if untreated, can occur in patients with adrenal insufficiency who have inadequate glucocorticoid therapy, acute illness, and physical stress. Therefore, all patients with adrenal insufficiency should be instructed how to increase glucocorticoids during acute illness and prescribed injectable glucocorticoids (eg, hydrocortisone, 100 mg intramuscular injection) to prevent or treat adrenal crisis.

Conclusions and relevance: Although primary and secondary adrenal insufficiency are rare, glucocorticoid-induced adrenal insufficiency is a common condition. Diagnosis of adrenal insufficiency involves early-morning measurement of cortisol, corticotropin, and DHEAS. All patients with adrenal insufficiency should be treated with glucocorticoids and instructed how to prevent and treat adrenal crisis.

Author/s:

Anand Vaidya, James Findling, Irina Bancos

The ASAM National Practice Guideline for the Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder: 2020 Focused Update

Alex Haga — Wed, 13 Nov 2024 17:14:32 +0000

Date Added:

November 13, 2024

Journal/Publication:

Journal of Addiction Medicine

Publication Date:

March 1, 2020

Issue:

Volume:

Pages:

1-91

URL:

The ASAM National Practice Guideline for the Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder: 2020 Focused Update

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1097/ADM.0000000000000633

Keywords

Opioid

opioid abuse

addiction

PMID (1):

32511106

MeSH

opioid-related disorders

drug overdose

Endocarditis

The most recent guideline for management of opioid use disorder from the American Society of Addiction Medicine. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

The American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM) developed this National Practice Guideline for the Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder to provide information on evidence-based treatment of opioid use disorder. This guideline is an update and replacement of the 2015 ASAM National Practice Guideline for the Use of Medications in the Treatment of Addiction Involving Opioid Use.

Living Systematic Review on Cannabis and Other Plant-Based Treatments for Chronic Pain

Aubrey Delammermore — Thu, 13 Oct 2022 05:00:00 +0000

Date Added:

October 13, 2022

Journal/Publication:

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality

Publisher:

US Department of Health and Human Services

Publication Date:

October 6, 2022

URL:

Living Systematic Review on Cannabis and Other Plant-Based Treatments for Chronic Pain

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.23970/AHRQEPCCER250

Keywords

PMID (1):

34882379

MeSH

An updated version of a systematic review previously posted to RPR Exchange. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

In an effort to address the opioid epidemic, a prominent goal of current research is to identify alternative treatments with equal or better benefits for pain while avoiding potential unintended consequences that could result in harms.

This 'living' systematic review assesses the effectiveness and harms of cannabis and other plant-based treatments for chronic pain conditions. For the purposes of this review, plant-based compounds (PBCs) included are those that are similar to opioids in effect and that have the potential for addiction, misuse, and serious adverse effects; other PBCs such as herbal treatments are not included. The intended audience includes policy and decision makers, funders and researchers of treatments for chronic pain, and clinicians who treat chronic pain.

The report will be updated on a quarterly basis.

Author/s:

McDonagh, M. S., Wagner, J., Ahmed, A. Y., Fu, R., Morasco, B., Kansagara, D., Chou, R.

Trajectories of Opioid Use Following First Opioid Prescription in Opioid-Naive Youths and Young Adults

Devin Evans — Thu, 29 Apr 2021 05:00:00 +0000

Date Added:

May 19, 2021

Journal/Publication:

Journal of the American Medical Association Network Open

Publication Date:

April 1, 2021

Issue:

Volume:

URL:

Trajectories of Opioid Use Following First Opioid Prescription in Opioid-Naive Youths and Young Adults

Type:

Clinical Research Results

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.4552

Keywords

PMID (1):

33885777

MeSH

opioid-related disorders

prescriptions

Very interesting study showing two distinct patterns of opioid use behaviors among adolescents after being given a first opioid prescription for pain. Predictors of subsequent misuse were identified. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

Importance: Although prescription opioids are the most common way adolescents and young adults initiate opioid use, many studies examine population-level risks following the first opioid prescription. There is currently a lack of understanding regarding how patterns of opioid prescribing following the first opioid exposure may be associated with long-term risks.

Objective: To identify distinct patterns of opioid prescribing following the first prescription using group-based trajectory modeling and examine the patient-, clinician-, and prescription-level factors that may be associated with trajectory membership during the first year.

Design, setting, and participants: This cohort study examined Pennsylvania Medicaid enrollees' claims data from 2010 through 2016. Participants were aged 10 to 21 years at time of first opioid prescription. Data analysis was performed in March 2020.

Main outcomes and measures: This study used group-based trajectory modeling and defined trajectory status by opioid fill.

Results: Among the 189 477 youths who received an initial opioid prescription, 107 562 were female (56.8%), 81 915 were non-Latinx White (59.6%), and the median age was 16.9 (interquartile range [IQR], 14.6-18.8) years. During the subsequent year, 47 477 (25.1%) received at least one additional prescription. Among the models considered, the 2-group trajectory model had the best fit. Of those in the high-risk trajectory, 65.3% (n = 901) filled opioid prescriptions at month 12, in contrast to 13.1% (n = 6031) in the low-risk trajectory. Median age among the high-risk trajectory was 19.0 years (IQR, 17.1-20.0 years) compared with the low-risk trajectory (17.8 years [IQR, 15.8-19.4 years]). The high-risk trajectory received more potent prescriptions compared with the low-risk trajectory (median dosage of the index month for high-risk trajectory group: 10.0 MME/d [IQR, 5.0-21.2 MME/d] vs the low-risk trajectory group: 4.7 MME/d [IQR, 2.5-7.8 MME/d]; P < .001). The trajectories showed persistent differences with more youths in the high-risk trajectory going on to receive a diagnosis of opioid use disorder (30.0%; n = 412) compared with the low-risk group (10.1%; n = 4638) (P < .001).

Conclusions and relevance: This study's results identified 2 trajectories associated with elevated risk for persistent opioid receipt within 12 months following first opioid prescription. The high-risk trajectory was characterized by older age at time of first prescription, and longer and more potent first prescriptions. These findings suggest even short and low-dose opioid prescriptions can be associated with risks of persistent use for youths.

Author/s:

Wilson, J.D., Zbebe, K.Z., Kraemer, K., Liebschutz, J., Merlin, J., Miller, E., D., Donohue, J.

Responding to Unsafe Opioid Use: Abandon the Drug, Not the Patient

Devin Evans — Wed, 24 Mar 2021 05:00:00 +0000

Date Added:

March 24, 2021

Journal/Publication:

Journal of General Internal Medicine

Publication Date:

October 9, 2020

Issue:

Volume:

Pages:

790-791

URL:

Responding to Unsafe Opioid Use: Abandon the Drug, Not the Patient

Type:

Best Local Practices

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1007/s11606-020-06281-4

Keywords

Opioid Use

opioids

RISEOK

Opioid-Related Disorders

2019-nCOV

PMID (1):

33037590

MeSH

opioid-related disorders

Prejudice

An argument for not firing patients for opioid misuse. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

Physicians have a legal and ethical duty to protect their patients and support them during times of clinical need; the decision to end a doctor-patient relationship should not be made lightly. However, in a recent survey of 794 primary care practices, 90% reported discharging patients in the previous two years, often for opioid-related issues.1 Disruptive or inappropriate behavior was the most common reason for discharge (81%), but 78% reported dismissing patients for violations of a chronic pain or controlled substance agreement. We find this practice worrisome, particularly since many controlled substance agreements use coercive and stigmatizing language that patients may reluctantly sign or have trouble understanding.2 Although violent, threatening, or disruptive behavior may be a valid reason to discharge patients in certain circumstances, opioid misuse should rarely rise to this threshold

Author/s:

Tobin, Daniel G., Holt, Stephen R., Doolittle, Benjamin R.

Weekly and Monthly Subcutaneous Buprenorphine Depot Formulations vs Daily Sublingual Buprenorphine With Naloxone for Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Devin Evans — Thu, 14 Jan 2021 06:00:00 +0000

Date Added:

January 14, 2021

Journal/Publication:

Journal of the American Medical Association Internal Medicine

Publication Date:

June 1, 2018

Issue:

Volume:

178

Pages:

764-773

URL:

Weekly and Monthly Subcutaneous Buprenorphine Depot Formulations vs Daily Sublingual Buprenorphine With Naloxone for Treatment of Opioid Use Disorder: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Type:

Clinical Research Results

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.1052

Keywords

opioids

Opioid Use Disorder

Buprenorphine

Buprenorphine-naloxone

PMID (1):

29799968

MeSH

Delayed-Action Preparations

opioid-related disorders

Long-acting buprenorphine, given weekly or monthly seem to work as well as daily SL buprenorphine for opioid use disorder. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

Importance: Buprenorphine treatment for opioid use disorder may be improved by sustained-release formulations.

Objective: To determine whether treatment involving novel weekly and monthly subcutaneous (SC) buprenorphine depot formulations is noninferior to a daily sublingual (SL) combination of buprenorphine hydrochloride and naloxone hydrochloride in the treatment of opioid use disorder.

Design, setting, and participants: This outpatient, double-blind, double-dummy randomized clinical trial was conducted at 35 sites in the United States from December 29, 2015, through October 19, 2016. Participants were treatment-seeking adults with moderate-to-severe opioid use disorder.

Interventions: Randomization to daily SL placebo and weekly (first 12 weeks; phase 1) and monthly (last 12 weeks; phase 2) SC buprenorphine (SC-BPN group) or to daily SL buprenorphine with naloxone (24 weeks) with matched weekly and monthly SC placebo injections (SL-BPN/NX group).

Main outcomes and measures: Primary end points tested for noninferiority were response rate (10% margin) and the mean proportion of opioid-negative urine samples for 24 weeks (11% margin). Responder status was defined as having no evidence of illicit opioid use for at least 8 of 10 prespecified points during weeks 9 to 24, with 2 of these at week 12 and during month 6 (weeks 21-24). The mean proportion of samples with no evidence of illicit opioid use (weeks 4-24) evaluated by a cumulative distribution function (CDF) was an a priori secondary outcome with planned superiority testing if the response rate demonstrated noninferiority.

Results: A total of 428 participants (263 men [61.4%] and 165 women [38.6%]; mean [SD] age, 38.4 [11.0] years) were randomized to the SL-BPN/NX group (n = 215) or the SC-BPN group (n = 213). The response rates were 31 of 215 (14.4%) for the SL-BPN/NX group and 37 of 213 (17.4%) for the SC-BPN group, a 3.0% difference (95% CI, -4.0% to 9.9%; P < .001). The proportion of opioid-negative urine samples was 1099 of 3870 (28.4%) for the SL-BPN/NX group and 1347 of 3834 (35.1%) for the SC-BPN group, a 6.7% difference (95% CI, -0.1% to 13.6%; P < .001). The CDF for the SC-BPN group (26.7%) was statistically superior to the CDF for the SL-BPN/NX group (0; P = .004). Injection site adverse events (none severe) occurred in 48 participants (22.3%) in the SL-BPN/NX group and 40 (18.8%) in the SC-BPN group.

Conclusions and relevance: Compared with SL buprenorphine, depot buprenorphine did not result in an inferior likelihood of being a responder or having urine test results negative for opioids and produced superior results on the CDF of no illicit opioid use. These data suggest that depot buprenorphine is efficacious and may have advantages.

Author/s:

Lofwall, Michelle R., Walsh, Sharon L., Nunes, Edward V., Bailey, Genie L., Sigmon, Stacey C., Kampman, Kyle M., Frost, Michael, Tiberg, Fredrik, Linden, Marareta, Sheldon, Behshad, Oosman, Sonia, Peterson, Stefan, Chen, Michael, Kim, Sonnie

Mind-Body Therapies for Opioid-Treated Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Devin Evans — Thu, 14 Jan 2021 06:00:00 +0000

Date Added:

January 14, 2021

Journal/Publication:

Journal of the American Medical Association Internal Medicine

Publication Date:

November 4, 2019

Issue:

Volume:

180

Pages:

91-105

URL:

Mind-Body Therapies for Opioid-Treated Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.4917

Keywords

Mind-Body Therapies

meditation

hypnosis

cognitive behavioral therapy

pain reduction

opioids

Opioid Epidemic

PMID (1):

31682676

MeSH

Cognitive Behavioral Therapy

opioid-related disorders

Adult

In this meta-analysis, moderate to large improvements in pain outcomes were found for meditation, hypnosis, suggestion, and cognitive behavioral therapy. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

Importance: Mind-body therapies (MBTs) are emerging as potential tools for addressing the opioid crisis. Knowing whether mind-body therapies may benefit patients treated with opioids for acute, procedural, and chronic pain conditions may be useful for prescribers, payers, policy makers, and patients.

Objective: To evaluate the association of MBTs with pain and opioid dose reduction in a diverse adult population with clinical pain.

Data sources: For this systematic review and meta-analysis, the MEDLINE, Embase, Emcare, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for English-language randomized clinical trials and systematic reviews from date of inception to March 2018. Search logic included (pain OR analgesia OR opioids) AND mind-body therapies. The gray literature, ClinicalTrials.gov, and relevant bibliographies were also searched.

Study selection: Randomized clinical trials that evaluated the use of MBTs for symptom management in adults also prescribed opioids for clinical pain.

Data extraction and synthesis: Independent reviewers screened citations, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Meta-analyses were conducted using standardized mean differences in pain and opioid dose to obtain aggregate estimates of effect size with 95% CIs.

Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome was pain intensity. The secondary outcomes were opioid dose, opioid misuse, opioid craving, disability, or function.

Results: Of 4212 citations reviewed, 60 reports with 6404 participants were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, MBTs were associated with pain reduction (Cohen d = -0.51; 95% CI, -0.76 to -0.26) and reduced opioid dose (Cohen d = -0.26; 95% CI, -0.44 to -0.08). Studies tested meditation (n = 5), hypnosis (n = 25), relaxation (n = 14), guided imagery (n = 7), therapeutic suggestion (n = 6), and cognitive behavioral therapy (n = 7) interventions. Moderate to large effect size improvements in pain outcomes were found for meditation (Cohen d = -0.70), hypnosis (Cohen d = -0.54), suggestion (Cohen d = -0.68), and cognitive behavioral therapy (Cohen d = -0.43) but not for other MBTs. Although most meditation (n = 4 [80%]), cognitive-behavioral therapy (n = 4 [57%]), and hypnosis (n = 12 [63%]) studies found improved opioid-related outcomes, fewer studies of suggestion, guided imagery, and relaxation reported such improvements. Most MBT studies used active or placebo controls and were judged to be at low risk of bias.

Conclusions and relevance: The findings suggest that MBTs are associated with moderate improvements in pain and small reductions in opioid dose and may be associated with therapeutic benefits for opioid-related problems, such as opioid craving and misuse. Future studies should carefully quantify opioid dosing variables to determine the association of mind-body therapies with opioid-related outcomes.

Author/s:

Garland, Eric L., Brintz, Carrie E., Hanley, Adam W., Roseen, Eric J., Atchley, Rachel M., Gaylord, Susan A., Faurot, Keturah R., Yaffe, Joanne, Fiander, Michelle, Keefe, Francis J.

Polypharmacy Management in Older Patients

Devin Evans — Thu, 14 Jan 2021 06:00:00 +0000

Date Added:

January 21, 2021

Journal/Publication:

Mayo Clinic Proceedings

Publication Date:

January 5, 2021

Issue:

Volume:

Pages:

242-256

URL:

Polypharmacy Management in Older Patients

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1016/j.mayocp.2020.06.012

Keywords

PMID (1):

33413822

MeSH

A nice summary of the hazards, prevention, and management of polypharmacy in the elderly. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

Medications to treat disease and extend life in our patients often amass in quantities, resulting in what has been termed "polypharmacy." This imprecise label usually describes the accumulation of 5, and often more, medications. Polypharmacy in advancing age frequently results in drug therapy problems related to interactions, drug toxicity, falls with injury, delirium, and nonadherence. Polypharmacy is associated with resulting increased hospitalizations and higher costs of care for individuals and health care systems. To reduce polypharmacy, we delineate a systematic, consultative approach to identify highest-risk medications and drug-therapy problems. We address strategic reductions (deprescribing) of medications in palliative care, long-term care, and ambulatory older adults. Best practices for reducing opioids, benzodiazepines, and other high-risk medications include education about risk and agreement by patients and their families, advocates, and care teams. Addressing deprescribing should be within the framework of patients' health status as their care and goals transition from longevity to a plan of maintaining alertness, comfort, and satisfaction of quality of life. A team approach to address polypharmacy and avoidance of high-risk therapy is optimal within long-term care. Patients with terminal illnesses or those moving toward a comfort-care emphasis benefit from medication adjustments that are recognized beneficially within each patient's care goals. In caring for older adults, the acknowledgement that complicated regimens and high-risk medications requires a care plan to reduce or prevent medication-related problems and costs that are associated with polypharmacy.

Author/s:

Hoel, Robert W., Giddings-Connolly, Ryan M., Takahashi, Paul Y.

Provision of a Drug Deactivation System for Unused Opioid Disposal at Surgical Dismissal: Opportunity to Reduce Community Opioid Supply

Brian Desmarais — Mon, 10 Aug 2020 18:35:02 +0000

Date Added:

August 10, 2020

Journal/Publication:

Mayo Clinic Proceedings: Innovations, Quality & Outcomes

Publication Date:

August 4, 2020

Issue:

Volume:

Pages:

357-361

URL:

Provision of a Drug Deactivation System for Unused Opioid Disposal at Surgical Dismissal: Opportunity to Reduce Community Opioid Supply

Type:

Best Local Practices

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mayocpiqo.2020.04.007

Keywords

MeSH

A relatively simply way to help patients dispose of unused opioids. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Commercial full text (fees may apply)

View

Objective

To determine the impact of a drug deactivation system to post-surgical patients on the rate of opioid prescription disposal.

Patients and Methods

Two hundred post-operative patients discharged after inpatient surgery at a large academic medical center. This study was conducted August 20, 2018, through November 30, 2018. Patients were provided with a drug deactivation system (DDS) and instruction sheet along with their opioid prescription. Three to 4 weeks after dismissal, patients were surveyed about quantity of opioids remaining, use of DDS or other disposal methods, and satisfaction with DDS if used.

Results

One hundred forty-nine of 200 (74.5%) patients were surveyed. One hundred six reported leftover opioids and 29 (27.3%) had disposed of these medications. By the time of survey, 23 (21.2%) participants with leftover opioids had used the DDS to destroy their remaining supply and an additional 33 (31.1%) participants reported plans to use the disposal bag on a future date. Of the 23 participants who used the DDS, 22 (96.0%) reported that they were very satisfied with the disposal process.

Conclusion

Participants are willing to use a DDS and are satisfied with the process; however, additional education is needed to ensure timely disposal.

Author/s:

Ramel, C.M., Habermann, E.B., Thiels, C.A., Dierkhising, R.A.

Interventions for Substance Use Disorders in Adolescents: A Systematic Review

Brian Desmarais — Fri, 05 Jun 2020 18:28:32 +0000

Date Added:

June 5, 2020

Journal/Publication:

Comparative Effectiveness Review

Publisher:

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality

Publication Date:

May 21, 2020

Volume:

225

URL:

Interventions for Substance Use Disorders in Adolescents: A Systematic Review

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

https://doi.org/10.23970/AHRQEPCCER225

Keywords

MeSH

Family Characteristics

An AHRQ systematic review of substance abuse disorders in adolescents. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

Structured Abstract

Objectives. This systematic review (SR) synthesizes the literature on behavioral, pharmacologic, and combined interventions for adolescents ages 12 to 20 years with problematic substance use or substance use disorder. We included interventions designed to achieve abstinence, reduce use quantity and frequency, improve functional outcomes, and reduce substance-related harms.

Data sources. We conducted literature searches in MEDLINE, the Cochrane CENTRAL Trials Registry, Embase, CINAHL, and PsycINFO to identify primary studies meeting eligibility criteria through November 1, 2019.

Review methods. Studies were extracted into the Systematic Review Data Repository. We categorized interventions into seven primary intervention components: motivational interviewing (MI), family focused therapy (Fam), cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), psychoeducation, contingency management (CM), peer group therapy, and intensive case management. We conducted meta-analyses of comparative studies and evaluated the strength of evidence (SoE). The PROSPERO protocol registration number is CRD42018115388 .

Results. The literature search yielded 33,272 citations, of which 118 studies were included. Motivational interviewing reduced heavy alcohol use days by 0.7 days/month, alcohol use days by 1.2 days/month, and overall substance use problems by a standardized mean difference of 0.5, compared with treatment as usual. Brief MI did not reduce cannabis use days (net mean difference of 0). Across multiple intensive interventions, Fam was most effective, reducing alcohol use days by 3.5 days/month compared with treatment as usual. No intensive interventions reduced cannabis use days. Pharmacologic treatment of opioid use disorder led to a more than 4 times greater likelihood of abstinence with extended courses (2 to 3 months) of buprenorphine compared to short courses (14 to 28 days).

Conclusions. Brief interventions: MI reduces heavy alcohol use (low SoE), alcohol use days (moderate SoE), and substance use–related problems (low SoE) but does not reduce cannabis use days (moderate SoE). Nonbrief interventions: Fam may be most effective in reducing alcohol use (low SoE). More research is needed to identify other effective intensive behavioral interventions for alcohol use disorder. Intensive interventions did not appear to decrease cannabis use (low SoE). Some interventions (CBT, CBT+MI, and CBT+MI+CM) were associated with increased cannabis use (low SoE). Both MI and CBT reduce combined alcohol and other drug use (low SoE). Combined CBT+MI reduces illicit drug use (low SoE). Subgroup analyses of interest (male vs. female, racial and ethnic minorities, socioeconomic status, and family characteristics) were sparse, precluding conclusions regarding differential effects. Pharmacological interventions: longer courses of buprenorphine (2–3 months) are more effective than shorter courses (14–28 days) to reduce opioid use and achieve abstinence (low SoE). SRs in the college settings support use of brief interventions for students with any use, heavy or problematic use. More research is needed to identify the most effective combinations of behavioral and pharmacologic treatments for opioid, alcohol, and cannabis use disorders.

Citation

Suggested citation: Steele DW, Becker SJ, Danko KJ, Balk EM, Saldanha IJ, Adam GP, Bagley SM, Friedman C, Spirito A, Scott K, Ntzani EE, Saeed I, Smith B, Popp J, Trikalinos TA. Interventions for Substance Use Disorders in Adolescents: A Systematic Review. Comparative Effectiveness Review No. 225. (Prepared by the Brown Evidence-based Practice Center under Contract No. 290-2015-00002-I.) AHRQ Publication No. 20-EHC014. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. May 2020. Posted final reports are located on the Effective Health Care Program search page. DOI: https://doi.org/10.23970/AHRQEPCCER225 .

Author/s:

Steele, D.W., Becker, S.J., Danko, K.J., Balk, E.M., Saldanha, I.J., Adam, G.P., Bagley, S.M., Friedman, C., Spirito, A., Scott, K., Ntzani, E.E., Saeed, I., Smith, B., Popp J., Trikalinos, T.A.

Adolescent Opioid Misuse Attributable to Adverse Childhood Experiences

Brian Desmarais — Mon, 11 May 2020 15:45:07 +0000

Date Added:

May 11, 2020

Journal/Publication:

The Journal of Pediatrics

Publication Date:

May 1, 2020

Volume:

Online ahead of print.

URL:

Adolescent Opioid Misuse Attributable to Adverse Childhood Experiences

Type:

Clinical Research Results

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2020.05.001

Keywords

adverse childhood experience

MeSH

adolescent

child

Cross-Sectional Studies

adverse childhood experience

Another reason to routines ask about adverse childhood experiences. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Commercial full text (fees may apply)

View

Objectives

To estimate the proportion of opioid misuse attributable to adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) among adolescents.

Study design

A cross-sectional survey was administered to 10,546 7th‒12th grade students in northeastern Ohio in Spring 2018. Study measures included self-reported lifetime exposure to 10 ACEs and past 30 day use of nonmedical prescription opioid or heroin. Using generalized estimating equations, we evaluated associations between recent opioid misuse, individual ACEs, and cumulative number of ACEs. We calculated population attributable fractions (PAF) to determine the proportion of adolescents’ recent opioid misuse attributable to ACEs.

Results

Nearly one in 50 adolescents reported opioid misuse within 30 days (1.9%); ∼60% of youth experienced ≥1 ACE; 10.2% experienced ≥5 ACEs. Cumulative ACE exposure demonstrated a significant graded relationship with opioid misuse. Compared with youth with zero ACEs, youth with 1 ACE (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]: 1.9, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.9‒3.9), 2 ACEs (AOR: 3.8, CI: 1.9‒7.9), 3 ACEs (AOR: 3.7, CI: 2.2‒6.5), 4 ACEs (AOR: 5.8, CI: 3.1‒11.2), and ≥5 ACEs (AOR: 15.3, CI: 8.8‒26.6) had higher odds of recent opioid misuse. The population attributable fraction of recent opioid misuse associated with experiencing ≥1 ACE was 71.6% (CI: 59.8–83.5).

Conclusions

There was a significant graded relationship between number of ACEs and recent opioid misuse among adolescents. Over 70% of recent adolescent opioid misuse in our study population was attributable to ACEs. Efforts to decrease opioid misuse could include programmatic, policy, and clinical practice interventions to prevent and mitigate the negative effects of ACEs.

Author/s:

Swedo, E.A., Sumner, S.A., Fijter, S., Werhan, L., Norris, K., Beauregard, J.L., Montgomery, M.P., Rose, E.B., Hillis, S. D., Massetti, G.M.