opioid abuse

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

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.

Buprenorphine for Opioid Use Disorder-An Essential Medical Treatment

Alex Haga — Wed, 28 Aug 2024 13:28:21 +0000

Date Added:

August 28, 2024

Journal/Publication:

JAMA

Publication Date:

August 26, 2024

URL:

Buprenorphine for Opioid Use Disorder-An Essential Medical Treatment

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1001/jamainternmed.2024.3977

Keywords

Buprenorphine

Opioid

opioid abuse

PMID (1):

39186298

A review of buprenorphine for the treatment of patients with opioid use disorders. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

This Clinical Insights describes the process for initiating buprenorphine treatment for patients with opioid use disorder.

Author/s:

Melissa B Weimer, Kenneth L Morford

Safety and tolerability of natural and synthetic cannabinoids in adults aged over 50 years: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Devin Evans — Wed, 07 Apr 2021 05:00:00 +0000

Date Added:

April 7, 2021

Journal/Publication:

PLos Med

Publication Date:

March 29, 2021

Issue:

Volume:

URL:

Safety and tolerability of natural and synthetic cannabinoids in adults aged over 50 years: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1371/journal.pmed.1003524

Keywords

PMID (1):

33780450

MeSH

cannabinoids

aged

insulin receptor-related receptor

Drug Combinations

cannabidiol

A systematic review of studies of the use of natural and synthetic cannabinoids in people over 50. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

Background: Cannabinoid-based medicines (CBMs) are being used widely in the elderly. However, their safety and tolerability in older adults remains unclear. We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of safety and tolerability of CBMs in adults of age ≥50 years.

Methods and findings: A systematic search was performed using MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL PsychInfo, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov (1 January 1990 to 3 October 2020). Randomised clinical trials (RCTs) of CBMs in those with mean age of ≥50 years for all indications, evaluating the safety/tolerability of CBMs where adverse events have been quantified, were included. Study quality was assessed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) criteria and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Two reviewers conducted all review stages independently. Where possible, data were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis. Effect sizes were calculated as incident rate ratio (IRR) for outcome data such as adverse events (AEs), serious AEs (SAEs), and death and risk ratio (RR) for withdrawal from study and reported separately for studies using tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), THC:cannabidiol (CBD) combination, and CBD. A total of 46 RCTs were identified as suitable for inclusion of which 31 (67%) were conducted in the United Kingdom and Europe. There were 6,216 patients (mean age 58.6 ± 7.5 years; 51% male) included in the analysis, with 3,469 receiving CBMs. Compared with controls, delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)-containing CBMs significantly increased the incidence of all-cause and treatment-related AEs: THC alone (IRR: 1.42 [95% CI, 1.12 to 1.78]) and (IRR: 1.60 [95% CI, 1.26 to 2.04]); THC:CBD combination (IRR: 1.58 [95% CI,1.26 to 1.98]) and (IRR: 1.70 [95% CI,1.24 to 2.33]), respectively. IRRs of SAEs and deaths were not significantly greater under CBMs containing THC with or without CBD. THC:CBD combination (RR: 1.40 [95% CI, 1.08 to 1.80]) but not THC alone (RR: 1.18 [95% CI, 0.89 to 1.57]) significantly increased risk of AE-related withdrawals. CBD alone did not increase the incidence of all-cause AEs (IRR: 1.02 [95% CI, 0.90 to 1.16]) or other outcomes as per qualitative synthesis. AE-related withdrawals were significantly associated with THC dose in THC only [QM (df = 1) = 4.696, p = 0.03] and THC:CBD combination treatment ([QM (df = 1) = 4.554, p = 0.033]. THC-containing CBMs significantly increased incidence of dry mouth, dizziness/light-headedness, and somnolence/drowsiness. Study limitations include inability to fully exclude data from those <50 years of age in our primary analyses as well as limitations related to weaknesses in the included trials particularly incomplete reporting of outcomes and heterogeneity in included studies.

Conclusions: This pooled analysis, using data from RCTs with mean participant age ≥50 years, suggests that although THC-containing CBMs are associated with side effects, CBMs in general are safe and acceptable in older adults. However, THC:CBD combinations may be less acceptable in the dose ranges used and their tolerability may be different in adults over 65 or 75 years of age.

Author/s:

Velayudhan, Latha, McGoohan, Katie, Bhattacharyya, Sagnik

Management of Persistent Pain in the Older Patient A Clinical Review

Devin Evans — Fri, 02 Apr 2021 05:00:00 +0000

Date Added:

April 2, 2021

Journal/Publication:

Journal of the American Medical Association

Issue:

Volume:

312

Pages:

825-836

URL:

Management of Persistent Pain in the Older Patient A Clinical Review

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1001/jama.2014.9405

Keywords

PMID (1):

25157726

MeSH

A systematic review of published information on management of chronic pain in older patients. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

Importance: Persistent pain is highly prevalent, costly, and frequently disabling in later life.

Objective: To describe barriers to the management of persistent pain among older adults, summarize current management approaches, including pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic modalities; present rehabilitative approaches; and highlight aspects of the patient-physician relationship that can help to improve treatment outcomes. This review is relevant for physicians who seek an age-appropriate approach to delivering pain care for the older adult.

Evidence acquisition: Search of MEDLINE and the Cochrane database from January 1990 through May 2014, using the search terms older adults, senior, ages 65 and above, elderly, and aged along with non-cancer pain, chronic pain, persistent pain, pain management, intractable pain, and refractory pain to identify English-language peer-reviewed systematic reviews, meta-analyses, Cochrane reviews, consensus statements, and guidelines relevant to the management of persistent pain in older adults.

Findings: Of the 92 identified studies, 35 evaluated pharmacologic interventions, whereas 57 examined nonpharmacologic modalities; the majority (n = 50) focused on older adults with osteoarthritis. This evidence base supports a stepwise approach with acetaminophen as first-line therapy. If treatment goals are not met, a trial of a topical nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug, tramadol, or both is recommended. Oral nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are not recommended for long-term use. Careful surveillance to monitor for toxicity and efficacy is critical, given that advancing age increases risk for adverse effects. A multimodal approach is strongly recommended-emphasizing a combination of both pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments to include physical and occupational rehabilitation, as well as cognitive-behavioral and movement-based interventions. An integrated pain management approach is ideally achieved by cultivating a strong therapeutic alliance between the older patient and the physician.

Conclusions and relevance: Treatment planning for persistent pain in later life requires a clear understanding of the patient's treatment goals and expectations, comorbidities, and cognitive and functional status, as well as coordinating community resources and family support when available. A combination of pharmacologic, nonpharmacologic, and rehabilitative approaches in addition to a strong therapeutic alliance between the patient and physician is essential in setting, adjusting, and achieving realistic goals of therapy.

Author/s:

Makris, Una E., Abrams, Robert C., Durland, Barry, Reid, M.C.

Existing methods of screening for substance abuse (standardized questionnaires or clinician’s simply asking) have proven difficult to initiate and maintain in primary care settings. This article reports on how predictive modeling can be used to screen for

Devin Evans — Wed, 03 Mar 2021 06:00:00 +0000

Date Added:

March 3, 2021

Journal/Publication:

Big Data

Publication Date:

September 1, 2018

Issue:

Volume:

Pages:

214-224

URL:

Existing methods of screening for substance abuse (standardized questionnaires or clinician’s simply asking) have proven difficult to initiate and maintain in primary care settings. This article reports on how predictive modeling can be used to screen for

Type:

Practice Management Research Results

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1089/big.2018.0002

Keywords

PMID (1):

30283729

MeSH

Veterans

substance-related disorders

primary health care

outpatients

This article provides guidance on how to identify patients with substance use disorders from data available in the EMR. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

Existing methods of screening for substance abuse (standardized questionnaires or clinician's simply asking) have proven difficult to initiate and maintain in primary care settings. This article reports on how predictive modeling can be used to screen for substance abuse using extant data in electronic health records (EHRs). We relied on data available through Veterans Affairs Informatics and Computing Infrastructure (VINCI) for the years 2006 through 2016. We focused on 4,681,809 veterans who had at least two primary care visits; 829,827 of whom had a hospitalization. Data included 699 million outpatient and 17 million inpatient records. The dependent variable was substance abuse as identified from 89 diagnostic codes using the Agency for Healthcare Quality and Research classification of diseases. In addition, we included the diagnostic codes used for identification of prescription abuse. The independent variables were 10,292 inpatient and 13,512 outpatient diagnoses, plus 71 dummy variables measuring age at different years between 20 and 90 years. A modified naive Bayes model was used to aggregate the risk across predictors. The accuracy of the predictions was examined using area under the receiver operating characteristic (AROC) curve in 20% of data, randomly set aside for the evaluation. Many physical/mental illnesses were associated with substance abuse. These associations supported findings reported in the literature regarding the impact of substance abuse on various diseases and vice versa. In randomly set-aside validation data, the model accurately predicted substance abuse for inpatient (AROC = 0.884), outpatient (AROC = 0.825), and combined inpatient and outpatient (AROC = 0.840) data. If one excludes information available after substance abuse is known, the cross-validated AROC remained high, 0.822 for inpatient and 0.817 for outpatient data. Data within EHRs can be used to detect existing or predict potential future substance abuse.

Author/s:

Alemi, Farrokh, Avramovic, Sanja, Schwartz, Mark D.