Jenna Goesling

New persistent opioid use after minor and major surgical procedures in us adults

Importance Despite increased focus on reducing opioid prescribing for long-term pain, little is known regarding the incidence and risk factors for persistent opioid use after surgery. Objective To determine the incidence of new persistent opioid use after minor and major surgical procedures. Design, Setting, and Participants Using a nationwide insurance claims data set from 2013 to 2014, we identified US adults aged 18 to 64 years without opioid use in the year prior to surgery (ie, no opioid prescription fulfillments from 12 months to 1 month prior to the procedure). For patients filling a perioperative opioid prescription, we calculated the incidence of persistent opioid use for more than 90 days among opioid-naive patients after both minor surgical procedures (ie, varicose vein removal, laparoscopic cholecystectomy, laparoscopic appendectomy, hemorrhoidectomy, thyroidectomy, transurethral prostate surgery, parathyroidectomy, and carpal tunnel) and major surgical procedures (ie, ventral incisional hernia repair, colectomy, reflux surgery, bariatric surgery, and hysterectomy). We then assessed data for patient-level predictors of persistent opioid use. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was defined a priori prior to data extraction. The primary outcome was new persistent opioid use, which was defined as an opioid prescription fulfillment between 90 and 180 days after the surgical procedure. Results A total of 36 177 patients met the inclusion criteria, with 29 068 (80.3%) receiving minor surgical procedures and 7109 (19.7%) receiving major procedures. The cohort had a mean (SD) age of 44.6 (11.9) years and was predominately female (23 913 [66.1%]) and white (26 091 [72.1%]). The rates of new persistent opioid use were similar between the 2 groups, ranging from 5.9% to 6.5%. By comparison, the incidence in the nonoperative control cohort was only 0.4%. Risk factors independently associated with new persistent opioid use included preoperative tobacco use (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.35; 95% CI, 1.21-1.49), alcohol and substance abuse disorders (aOR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.05-1.72), mood disorders (aOR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.01-1.30), anxiety (aOR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.10-1.42), and preoperative pain disorders (back pain: aOR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.42-1.75; neck pain: aOR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.07-1.39; arthritis: aOR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.40-1.73; and centralized pain: aOR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.26-1.54). Conclusions and Relevance New persistent opioid use after surgery is common and is not significantly different between minor and major surgical procedures but rather associated with behavioral and pain disorders. This suggests its use is not due to surgical pain but addressable patient-level predictors. New persistent opioid use represents a common but previously underappreciated surgical complication that warrants increased awareness.

Pain and Depression: An Integrative Review of Neurobiological and Psychological Factors

The comorbidity of pain and depression has been well established in the literature and is associated with a greater burden to the individual and society than either condition alone. The relationship between pain and depression is quite complex and multiple factors must be considered when trying to disentangle the pain-depression link including shared neurobiology, precipitating environmental factors and cognitive influences. This article aims to provide an overview of the leading neurobiological and psychosocial theories that have advanced our understanding of the link between pain and depression. To this end we describe the shared neurobiological mechanisms in the brain thought to explain the overlap and consider psychological processes and how they inform a cognitive behavioral model. The article also provides an overview of the evidence based treatment for comorbid pain and depression.

Trends and predictors of opioid use after total knee and total hip arthroplasty.

Abstract Few studies have assessed postoperative trends in opioid cessation and predictors of persistent opioid use after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA). Preoperatively, 574 TKA and THA patients completed validated, self-report measures of pain, functioning, and mood and were longitudinally assessed for 6 months after surgery. Among patients who were opioid naive the day of surgery, 8.2% of TKA and 4.3% of THA patients were using opioids at 6 months. In comparison, 53.3% of TKA and 34.7% of THA patients who reported opioid use the day of surgery continued to use opioids at 6 months. Patients taking >60 mg oral morphine equivalents preoperatively had an 80% likelihood of persistent use postoperatively. Day of surgery predictors for 6-month opioid use by opioid-naive patients included greater overall body pain (P = 0.002), greater affected joint pain (knee/hip) (P = 0.034), and greater catastrophizing (P = 0.010). For both opioid-naive and opioid users on the day of surgery, decreases in overall body pain from baseline to 6 months were associated with decreased odds of being on opioids at 6 months (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 0.72, P = 0.050; aOR = 0.62, P = 0.001); however, change in affected joint pain (knee/hip) was not predictive of opioid use (aOR = 0.99, P = 0.939; aOR = 1.00, P = 0.963). In conclusion, many patients taking opioids before surgery continue to use opioids after arthroplasty and some opioid-naive patients remained on opioids; however, persistent opioid use was not associated with change in joint pain. Given the growing concerns about chronic opioid use, the reasons for persistent opioid use and perioperative prescribing of opioids deserve further study.

Characteristics of chronic pain patients who take opioids and persistently report high pain intensity

Background and Objectives The use of self-report questionnaires to detect characteristics of altered central pain processing, as seen in centralized pain disorders such as fibromyalgia, allow for the epidemiological studies of pain patients. Here, we assessed the relationship between reporting high levels of pain while taking opioids and the presence of characteristics associated with centralized pain. Methods We evaluated 582 patients taking opioid medications using validated measures of clinical pain, neuropathic pain symptoms, mood, and functioning. A multivariate linear regression model was used to assess the association between levels of pain while taking opioids and presenting with characteristics consistent with having centralized pain. Results We found that 49% of patients taking opioids continued to report severe pain (≥ 7/10). In multivariate analysis, factors associated with having higher levels of pain in opioid users included higher fibromyalgia survey scores (P = 0.001), more neuropathic pain symptoms (P < 0.001), and higher levels of depression (P = 0.002). Although only 3.2% were given a primary diagnosis of fibromyalgia by their physician, 40.8% met American College of Rheumatology survey criteria for fibromyalgia. Conclusions Our findings suggest that patients with persistently high pain scores despite opioid therapy are more likely than those with lower levels of pain to present with characteristics associated with having centralized pain. This study cannot determine whether these characteristics were present before (fibromyalgia-like patient) or after the initiation of opioids (opioid-induced hyperalgesia). Regardless, patients with a centralized pain phenotype are thought to be less responsive to opioids and may merit alternative approaches.

Cigarette smoking and pain: Depressive symptoms mediate smoking-related pain symptoms

TOC summary Smoking rates in patients seen at a multi‐disciplinary pain clinic were high. Depressive symptoms emerged as a mediating factor in the relationship between smoking and pain. Abstract Numerous studies have shown an association between smoking and pain, with smokers reporting more pain and worse functioning. However, little is known about factors that impact this complex relationship. This study investigated the association between smoking, pain, and depressive symptoms. Participants were new patients seen at a multidisciplinary pain clinic. All patients were mailed an intake packet of validated questionnaires as part of an ongoing research and clinical care initiative. Of the 497 patients evaluated, 426 had valid smoking data. Among these patients, 32.6% (n = 139) reported being current smokers, 31.7% (n = 135) were classified as former smokers, and 35.7% (n = 152) were never smokers. A multivariate analysis of covariance (smoking status, age, gender, education) revealed a main effect for pain severity (F = 7.36, P < 0.001), pain interference (F = 4.03, P = 0.001), and depressive symptoms (F = 7.87, P < 0.001). Current smokers demonstrated higher pain severity, pain interference, and depressive symptoms compared with former smokers and never smokers (P < 0.01 for all analyses), while there were no differences between the former‐smoker and never‐smoker groups. However, the effect of smoking on pain severity (P = 0.06) and pain interference (P = 0.22) was no longer significant after controlling for depressive symptoms in a mediation model. Additionally, among former smokers, longer quit duration was associated with less pain severity. In conclusion, smoking rates were high and smoking was associated with a worse chronic pain phenotype. Importantly, depressive symptoms emerged as a critical mediating factor in helping to explain the relationship between smoking and pain.

Symptoms of Depression Are Associated With Opioid Use Regardless of Pain Severity and Physical Functioning Among Treatment-Seeking Patients With Chronic Pain

Depression may be a critical factor in the initiation and maintenance of opioids. This study investigated the association among opioid use, pain, and depression in patients evaluated at a university-based outpatient pain clinic. Of the 2,104 new patients included, 55.89% reported current opioid use and showed a worse phenotypic profile (eg, higher pain severity, worse physical functioning) compared with nonopioid users. In addition, more opioid users reported symptoms suggestive of depression than those not taking opioids (43.6% vs 26.8%, P < .001). In a multivariate logistic regression model, increased pain severity was associated with increased probability of taking opioids; however, this was moderated by depression (estimate = -.212, P < .001). For nondepressed patients, the predicted probabilities of opioid use increased as pain severity increased. In contrast, among patients with symptoms of depression, the probability of taking opioids did not change based on pain severity. Similarly, although increased physical function was associated with increased probability of opioid use, this was moderated by depression (estimate = .033, P = .034). Patients with symptoms of depression were more likely to be taking opioids at higher levels of functioning (Ps < .03). Perspective: This study investigated the association among opioid use, pain, and depression at a university-based outpatient pain clinic. Depression emerged as a moderator of the relationship among opioid use, pain severity, and physical functioning. These findings lend support to the hypothesis that patients may be self-medicating affective pain with opioids.

Prevalence of the fibromyalgia phenotype in patients with spine pain presenting to a tertiary care pain clinic and the potential treatment implications

OBJECTIVE Injections for spinal pain have high failure rates, emphasizing the importance of patient selection. It is possible that detecting the presence of a fibromyalgia (FM)-like phenotype could aid in prediction, because in these individuals a peripheral injection would not address pain due to alterations in central neurotransmission. We undertook this study to test the hypothesis that patients who have spine pain meeting survey criteria for FM would be phenotypically distinct from those who do not. METHODS We studied 548 patients diagnosed as having primary spine pain. All patients completed validated self-report questionnaires, including the Brief Pain Inventory, the PainDETECT questionnaire, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, measures of physical function, and the FM criteria and severity scales. RESULTS Forty-two percent of the patients were FM positive according to the FM criteria and severity scales. Compared with FM-negative patients, FM-positive patients were more likely to be younger, unemployed, and receiving compensation for pain and to have greater pain severity and pain interference and more neuropathic pain descriptors as well as higher levels of depression and anxiety and a lower level of physical function (P < 0.002 for each comparison). Female sex, neuropathic pain, pain interference, and anxiety were independently predictive of FM status in a multivariate analysis (P < 0.01 for all variables). Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis showed a strength of association of 0.80 as measured by the cross-validated C statistic. CONCLUSION Using the FM criteria and severity scales, we demonstrated profound phenotypic differences in a population of patients with spine pain. Although centralized pain cannot be confirmed with a self-report instrument alone, the pathophysiology of FM may help explain a portion of the variability of responses to spine interventions.

Longitudinal assessment of pain outcomes in the clinical setting: development of the "APOLO" electronic data capture system.

Abstract Data to fully evaluate the effectiveness of many commonly used interventions in the clinical pain management setting are inadequate. Clinical data collected for patient management often are not based on validated instruments, and this impedes the ability to conduct longitudinal research. To address these needs, modified patient intake and return visit forms were established and the Assessment of Pain Outcomes Longitudinal Electronic Data Capture system was developed. Data collection has been underway since November 22, 2010. As of December 7, 2011, 951 New Patient and 688 Return Visit forms had been entered. The forms have been well received, with less than 6.5% failing to complete at least 90% of the data requested. Accuracy of data entry is excellent, with an error rate of 1 in 11,250 potential data points. Data output converts easily to standard statistical programs. The creation of a pain outcomes database using validated measures and clinically relevant data is feasible.

Preliminary validation of the Michigan Body Map

Abstract We developed the Michigan Body Map (MBM) as a self-report measure to assess body areas where chronic pain is experienced and to specifically quantify the degree of widespread body pain when assessing for centralized pain features (eg, fibromyalgia-like presentation). A total of 402 patients completed the measure in 5 distinct studies to support the validation of the original and a revised version of the MBM. Administration is rapid 39 to 44 seconds, and errors for the original MBM were detected in only 7.2% of the possible body areas. Most errors underestimated the number of painful areas or represented confusion in determining the right vs left side. The MBM was preferred (P = 0.013) and felt to better depict pain location (P = 0.001) when compared with the Widespread Pain Index checklist of the 2011 Fibromyalgia Survey Criteria, but participants did not express any preference between the MBM and Brief Pain Inventory body map. Based on the data from the first 3 studies, a revised version of the MBM was created including a front and back body image and improved guidance on right-sidedness vs left. The revised MBM was preferred when compared with the original and was more accurate in depicting painful body areas (P = 0.004). Furthermore, the revised MBM showed convergent and discriminant validity with other self-report measures of pain, mood, and function. In conclusion, the MBM demonstrated utility, reliability, and construct validity. This new measure can be used to accurately assess the distribution of pain or widespread bodily pain as an element of the fibromyalgia survey score.

Pressure Pain Sensitivity in Patients With Suspected Opioid-Induced Hyperalgesia.

Background and Objectives This study was designed to test whether a brief quantitative sensory testing assessment could be used to detect hyperalgesia in patients with suspected opioid-induced hyperalgesia (OIH). Methods Twenty patients on long-term opioid therapy with suspected OIH were recruited along with 20 healthy controls. Pressure pain threshold, Pain50, a measure of intermediate suprathreshold pressure pain sensitivity, and tolerance levels were evaluated. As a secondary outcome, changes in pressure pain sensitivity after intravenous administration of placebo (saline) and fentanyl (1.5 &mgr;g/kg) were assessed. Results There were no significant differences in pain measures between healthy controls and patients. However, there was an association between higher doses of opioids and having a lower pain tolerance (r = −0.46, P = 0.041) and lower Pain50 (r = −0.46, P = 0.044), which was consistent with the hypothesis. Patients on more than 100 mg oral morphine equivalents displayed decreased pressure pain tolerance compared with patients taking less than 100 mg oral morphine equivalents (P = 0.042). In addition, male patients showed a hyperalgesic response to fentanyl administration, which was significant for the Pain50 measure (P = 0.002). Conclusions Whereas there were no differences between patients suspected of having OIH and the healthy controls, the finding that higher doses of opioids were associated with more sensitivity suggests that dose might be an important factor in the development of hyperalgesia. In addition, male patients demonstrated a hyperalgesic response after a bolus of fentanyl. Future studies are needed to develop better diagnostics for detecting hyperalgesia in the clinical setting.