CDC Draft Guidelines for Opioid Prescribing CDC Draft Guidelines for Opioid Prescribing 1. Non-ph

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

101N

Membership Revoked
Removed
10+ Year Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2011
Messages
5,313
Reaction score
1,086
CDC Draft Guidelines for Opioid Prescribing


1. Non-pharmacological therapy and non-opioid pharmacological therapy are preferred for chronic pain. Providers should only consider adding opioid therapy if expected benefits for both pain and function are anticipated to outweigh risks.


2. Before starting long term opioid therapy, providers should establish treatment goals with all patients, including realistic goals for pain and function. Providers should continue opioid therapy only if there is clinically meaningful improvement in pain and function that outweighs risks to patient safety.


3. Before starting and periodically during opioid therapy, providers should discuss with patients risks and realistic benefits of opioid therapy and patient and provider responsibilities for managing therapy.


4. When starting opioid therapy, providers should prescribe short-acting opioids instead of extended-release/long acting opioids.


5. When opioids are started, providers should prescribe the lowest possible effective dosage. Providers should implement additional precautions when increasing dosage to 50 or greater milligrams per day in morphine equivalents and should avoid increasing dosages to 90 or greater milligrams per day in morphine equivalents.


6. Long-term opioid use often begins with treatment of acute pain. When opioids are used for acute pain, providers should prescribe the lowest effective dose of short-acting opioids and should prescribe no greater quantity than needed for the expected duration of pain severe enough to require opioids. Three or fewer days will usually be sufficient for non-traumatic pain not related to major surgery.


7. Providers should evaluate patients within 1 to 4 weeks of starting long-term opioid therapy or of dose escalation to assess benefits and harms of continued opioid therapy. Providers should evaluate patients receiving long-term opioid therapy every 3 months or more frequently for benefits and harms of continued opioid therapy. If benefits do not outweigh harms of continued opioid therapy, providers should work with patients to reduce opioid dosage and to discontinue opioids when possible.


8. Before starting and periodically during continuation of opioid therapy, providers should evaluate risk factors for opioid-related harms. Providers should incorporate into the management plan strategies to mitigate risk, including considering offering naloxone when factors that increase risk for opioid-related harms are present.


9. Providers should review the patient’s history of controlled substance prescriptions using state Prescription Drug Monitoring Program data to determine whether the patient is receiving excessive opioid dosages or dangerous combinations that put him/her at high risk for overdose. Providers should review Prescription Monitoring Program data when starting opioid therapy and periodically during long-term opioid therapy (ranging from every prescription to every 3 months).


10. Providers should use urine drug testing before starting opioids for chronic pain and consider urine drug testing at least annually for all patients on long-term opioid therapy to assess for prescribed medications as well as other controlled substances and illicit drugs.


11. Providers should avoid prescribing of opioid pain medication and benzodiazepines concurrently whenever possible.


12. Providers should offer or arrange evidence-based treatment (usually opioid agonist treatment in combination with behavioral therapies) for patients with opioid use disorder.
 
So...what would everyone recommend with regards to #11 when a patient comes in on large doses of both a benzo and an opioid? To add context, the benzo was started by a psychiatrist a years ago, the opioid was started by a pain specialist years ago, and both have been out of the picture for a couple years with no plan to follow up. There's also no pain contract and all you have access to is the PCP's notes that are the same every time, saying that the person has chronic pain and that the med was refilled. You put through a referral for reevaluation by both and get appointment dates that are anywhere from 6 months to 1 year away...what would you do in the meantime? For additional context, I very rarely initiate benzos or opioids (especially for long-term use), but encounter this kind of situation more often than I would like.
 
Instatewaiter Draft Guidelines for Opioid Prescribing


1. I don't prescribe narcotics. If you want narcotics, go somewhere else.

2. See 1
 
Gastrapathy's guidelines:

Do you have a terrible cancer that will inevitably lead to your demise that I've just dx'd and you haven't seen onc yet?

Yes: Here you go. Try not to let your nephew snort too much of your drugs. Oh, and you should start smoking pot. Here's some miralax too.

No: See Instatewaiter.
 
So...what would everyone recommend with regards to #11 when a patient comes in on large doses of both a benzo and an opioid? To add context, the benzo was started by a psychiatrist a years ago, the opioid was started by a pain specialist years ago, and both have been out of the picture for a couple years with no plan to follow up. There's also no pain contract and all you have access to is the PCP's notes that are the same every time, saying that the person has chronic pain and that the med was refilled. You put through a referral for reevaluation by both and get appointment dates that are anywhere from 6 months to 1 year away...what would you do in the meantime? For additional context, I very rarely initiate benzos or opioids (especially for long-term use), but encounter this kind of situation more often than I would like.

You talk about the undesirability of chronic benzo/opioid administration. Then you talk about how you're going to be tapering them off both.

If they don't like the plan, they can head off to the next bozo doctor that's willing to 'hand out the candy'.

Benzos + opioids = highway to the danger zone, and I'm not going to be fueling someone's seemingly inevitable OD.

Shame on the psychiatrist who started the benzo - most psych docs I've encountered hate benzos even more than I do (which is really saying something).

There are some limited scenarios (postop pain, fractures, etc) where giving a (very) short course of prudently prescribed opioids may be reasonable, but my policy is to never, ever, ever, ever introduce somebody to a benzodiazepine outside of truly palliative situations.

Benzos :: anxious people : catnip :: cats.

Giving them out to anxious people (even 'as we get the SSRI titrated up', as I still see some attendings advising) is like giving that mouse a cookie - he's going to ask for milk, and ask, and ask, and ask, and you'll never get him away from it.

Some docs are even letting their DEA numbers lapse to get away from this nonsense, and I can't argue too much with that.
 
90mg morphine equivalents is pretty generous. Most non-pain attendings I know won't go over 20-40/day.
 
90mg morphine equivalents is pretty generous. Most non-pain attendings I know won't go over 20-40/day.
Have you never met an oncologist? 90mg of morphine is kind of a starting point.

(And yes, I realize these guidelines are for non-malignant pain.)
 
So...what would everyone recommend with regards to #11 when a patient comes in on large doses of both a benzo and an opioid? To add context, the benzo was started by a psychiatrist a years ago, the opioid was started by a pain specialist years ago, and both have been out of the picture for a couple years with no plan to follow up. There's also no pain contract and all you have access to is the PCP's notes that are the same every time, saying that the person has chronic pain and that the med was refilled. You put through a referral for reevaluation by both and get appointment dates that are anywhere from 6 months to 1 year away...what would you do in the meantime? For additional context, I very rarely initiate benzos or opioids (especially for long-term use), but encounter this kind of situation more often than I would like.

You talk about the undesirability of chronic benzo/opioid administration. Then you talk about how you're going to be tapering them off both.

If they don't like the plan, they can head off to the next bozo doctor that's willing to 'hand out the candy'.

Benzos + opioids = highway to the danger zone, and I'm not going to be fueling someone's seemingly inevitable OD.

Shame on the psychiatrist who started the benzo - most psych docs I've encountered hate benzos even more than I do (which is really saying something).

There are some limited scenarios (postop pain, fractures, etc) where giving a (very) short course of prudently prescribed opioids may be reasonable, but my policy is to never, ever, ever, ever introduce somebody to a benzodiazepine outside of truly palliative situations.

Benzos :: anxious people : catnip :: cats.

Giving them out to anxious people (even 'as we get the SSRI titrated up', as I still see some attendings advising) is like giving that mouse a cookie - he's going to ask for milk, and ask, and ask, and ask, and you'll never get him away from it.

Some docs are even letting their DEA numbers lapse to get away from this nonsense, and I can't argue too much with that.

Honestly, there's is a certain cohort of patients that have legit issues, on small to medium size doses of opiod +/- benzo, that you inherit, & they just aren't a problem. Unless you start a taper.

Without a compelling reason to make a change, I just wouldn't. Neither does my clinic preceptor (so this isn't just my inexperienced take on this, my preceptor & I just happen to see eye to eye on this)

Not a lot of lost prescriptions, requests to increase, ED visits, obnoxious phone calls, doctor shopping, missed appointments, issues with piss tests, drugs in general, if they're not boozing quite a few patients handle their opiate benzo MJ cocktail just fine. I see those patients, screen for serious SEs (constipation, drowsiness, driving, nausea, all can = serious badness down the line) start a contract, read them a riot act, eliminate centrally acting meds/polypharm where I can, and maintain status quo.

As long as they're not going to pop a gut, I think they are actually eating all the pills themselves, and are tolerant & not mixing in booze where I'm worried about vomiting/aspiration, they're young enough not to be too worried about breaking a bone if they topple over, basically if they can handle their drugs they can have them. What we really don't want frankly is criminal/legal trouble, diversion of meds, hospitalization for bowel obstruction/fracture, aspiration, or respiratory depression, car accidents.

I'm not a drug dealer but I'm also not the moral or otherwise police.

I see enough harm from withholding that I just don't unless I need to. It doesn't have to be the rule. It'd be like pulling teeth for me to start these meds but I'm not interested in yanking them from the person minding their business on them. I see people going to the black market, in legit pain and now OD'ing on NSAIDs with CKD, life threatening GIBs, misery, turning to other drugs, suicide, going from working to not working or serious decline in function/quality of life, the list goes on and on, but that's the list we don't want to look at. If you hurt yourself trying to get out of pain rather than just dealing with it opiate free, we hardly see that as a reason to prescribe but I don't hold to that. I'm about harm reduction and sometimes harm reduction is just continuing the prescription.
 
You're aware of the significant side effects associated with chronic benzo use (including falls, possible contribution to dementia, memory loss, worsening insomnia, etc), right?

And you're aware of chronic opioid use and its associated adrenal insufficiency, tolerance issues, erectile dysfunction, possible contribution to cancer risk, etc right?

How many pts do you see who are on benzos for GAD and yet are still climbing up the walls with anxiety? How well is THAT working for them?

How many chronic pain pts who are on opioids are satisfied with their pain control? (LOL, right?)

It's not about being 'thought police' or moral warriors, it's about practicing safe and responsible medicine where you're looking out for what's safest and best in the long run for a patient (even when the pt isn't!). A lot of patients are not good advocates for their own best interests. I dare say that 90% of the people I've ever seen who are on chronic opioids for nonmalignant pain aren't getting a net benefit from them...in fact, they're usually suffering from several horrendous net negative effects and are probably worse off then when they started them.

I'm all about harm reduction and I rarely see things going better when this stuff is continued.
 
You're aware of the significant side effects associated with chronic benzo use (including falls, possible contribution to dementia, memory loss, worsening insomnia, etc), right?

And you're aware of chronic opioid use and its associated adrenal insufficiency, tolerance issues, erectile dysfunction, possible contribution to cancer risk, etc right?

How many pts do you see who are on benzos for GAD and yet are still climbing up the walls with anxiety? How well is THAT working for them?

How many chronic pain pts who are on opioids are satisfied with their pain control? (LOL, right?)

It's not about being 'thought police' or moral warriors, it's about practicing safe and responsible medicine where you're looking out for what's safest and best in the long run for a patient (even when the pt isn't!). A lot of patients are not good advocates for their own best interests. I dare say that 90% of the people I've ever seen who are on chronic opioids for nonmalignant pain aren't getting a net benefit from them...in fact, they're usually suffering from several horrendous net negative effects and are probably worse off then when they started them.

I'm all about harm reduction and I rarely see things going better when this stuff is continued.

All very good points. No argument here from me on the above. No, I haven't heard about a contribution to cancer risk, I'll have to learn more about that, that is interesting.

Chronic pain leading to depression would also be a contributor to erectile dysfunction.

I agree patients who are suffering from addiction (definition: continued use despite increasing harms) by definition would be unable to take proper stock of and respond to the balance of pro/con inherent in both our posts.

I like your post as a response to mine. That is what makes initiating, continuing, or discontinuing these prescriptions such a massive ****show for everyone involved.
 
Top