CDC guidelines

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

painfree23

Full Member
7+ Year Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2017
Messages
1,511
Reaction score
471
I use the CDC guidelines as a scape goat whenever patients want higher doses of narcotics...and it usually helps limiting escalating doses (even tho pts aren't happy).

However, I've had some providers refer to me after the patients fail to get better even after they r on 100mmeq/day (MSIR 30mg TID) . They suggest that bc im pain management I can prescribe higher doses and that the guidelines were primarily for pcps.

Any thoughts?

Members don't see this ad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
1. technically, MSIR 30 tid is 90 MED.

2. technically, the CDC guidelines are to be "used" by all doctors, regardless of pain management or not. the FSMB also encourages 90 MED.

3. remind the PCPs that the 90 MED they are prescribing is important in that the patient has still failed to get better, and that is where you come in, specifically to offer something other than more opioids.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
1. technically, MSIR 30 tid is 90 MED.

2. technically, the CDC guidelines are to be "used" by all doctors, regardless of pain management or not. the FSMB also encourages 90 MED.

3. remind the PCPs that the 90 MED they are prescribing is important in that the patient has still failed to get better, and that is where you come in, specifically to offer something other than more opioids.

2. The guidelines were written for PCPs.
https://www.cdc.gov/drugoverdose/pdf/guideline_infographic-a.pdf
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Members don't see this ad :)
So if you are a pain doc, are you off the hook if you prescribe > 90 MED for several patients (obviously documenting appropriate diagnosis and reasoning why) ?

what hook are you talking about? If you think unlimited patients on over 90 meq is a good idea, try it out. You will be a target of investigation.

I maintain a list of all my patients over 90 meq and keep it updated. I list my palliative patients separately, but track them. I also note separately again my 4 legacy patients over 200 meq. I have no one over 400meq.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
what hook are you talking about? If you think unlimited patients on over 90 meq is a good idea, try it out. You will be a target of investigation.

I maintain a list of all my patients over 90 meq and keep it updated. I list my palliative patients separately, but track them. I also note separately again my 4 legacy patients over 200 meq. I have no one over 400meq.

the hook of getting in trouble with DEA. Of course I don't want to give unlimited number > 90 meq. I'm just unsure of how "flexible" (for lack of better words) this CDC guideline is, particularly for pain management physicians.
 
the hook of getting in trouble with DEA. Of course I don't want to give unlimited number > 90 meq. I'm just unsure of how "flexible" (for lack of better words) this CDC guideline is, particularly for pain management physicians.

Which program did you match at Blitz?
 
the hook of getting in trouble with DEA. Of course I don't want to give unlimited number > 90 meq. I'm just unsure of how "flexible" (for lack of better words) this CDC guideline is, particularly for pain management physicians.

No one knows exactly what the hook is, how sharp it is, and how it is baited.
HOWEVER, I know the medical board in my state has physician reviewers who regard >90 MME as failing to practice within the standard of care. Will they fine you or take your license for prescribing a few pts over 90 MME if you document your reasoning and otherwise pay written homage to the hook?

NO ONE KNOWS :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I am sure things just depend on the situation. I have several high dose patients I took on. I took on one taking 240mg oxycodone BID. Weaning 20-40 mg a month. I think it just depends on where you are taking the patients.
 
So if you are a pain doc, are you off the hook if you prescribe > 90 MED for several patients (obviously documenting appropriate diagnosis and reasoning why) ?

This was my original question...that's what some of the pcps seem to think as these CDC guidelines are for pcps according to them
 
Correct. The very first line says, "This guideline provides recommendations for primary care clinicians who are prescribing opioids for chronic pain outside of active cancer treatment, palliative care, and end-of-life care.
CDC Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain — United States, 2016 | MMWR

After reading these when they first came out, my initial assumption was that they intentionally left open the door for "Pain physicians" to prescribe more in limited cases. Another assumption was that they were leaving the door open for "slightly higher" doses in "limited numbers of cases." Seems logical that if they were okay with PCPs going up to 90 MME/day, that they'd like be okay with Pain Mrs going to 120 MME/day or so. But these are all assumptions. None of it's spelled out, one way or the other. They haven't release any separate or specific "guidelines" for Pain physicians, to my knowledge. I think they're line of thinking is that by shear volume, the vast majority of opiate prescriptions are prescribe by PCPs. This is simply due to there being a much greater number of PCPs. They're likely thinking being that if they can reign in the largest segment first, then reassess and address the smaller subset of Pain specialists after that, while leaving the door cracked open a little bit, for some more aggressive treatment by specialists, preferably board certified specialists, in Pain. This is how I initially interpreted these guidelines.

As time has gone on, and as the regulators have turned up the heat on all of this, I've taken an even more conservative approach. The though process goes something like this: If the regulators don't think its recommended or safe for PCPs to prescribe these drugs at these doses, it stands to reason that it's not safe for anyone to do it, since it's the property of the drugs themselves that create the danger. In other words, if a bad outcome occurred, I don't think it would be a great stretch at all, for the DEA, a licensing board to point to the regulations and say, "The guidelines have been out there. What makes you think you should ignore them? If they make sense for PCPs they make sense for all prescribers" and hold us accountable to them, when it serves their purposes. So, I concluded that there's essentially no risk in following them and some risk (maybe a lot, maybe not) to deviating from them slightly, based on the fact that I'm a specialist in Pain with all the certifications, etc.

So, about 3 months ago I notified all my patients that I'd no longer be prescribing over 90 MME/day, citing the CDC recs, opiate crisis, changing medical standards, etc. I gave them all 30 days to think about it and consider getting a second opinion and switching Pain MD if they disagreed, and let them know that after that we'd start a slow taper. The vast majority of my patients were already at or below 90 MME/day, quite at 0 MME/day. I had a few (maybe 10-12 between 90-120 MME/day) and only 1 or 2 over 120 MME/day that were rocks solid, stable, that I inherited, that had perfect UDS/PMP/no-aberrancy track records. As of today, I've got them all at 90 MME/day except one who I just took down to 120, who was my highest dose patient, and who I'll finish tapering down to 90 in the next 4-8 weeks. As you'd expect, the most difficult have been the ones who were on the highest doses. A couple vowed to change pain docs to find a "high dose opiate specialist" and they all eventually came back because they couldn't find anyone to go over 90 MME/day anyways. So far I'm glad I've done it and it's gone better than expected. It also feels better to think and say, "I don't prescribe high dose opiates. If you need them, you need to find someone who offers that service."

The more difficult task, has been applying the benzo + opiate arm of the guidelines. 1) I don't prescribe any therapeutic benzos (only 1-2 tabs, no refills, for occasional MRI or major procedure). 2) I realized i had more patients that I had thought, on opiates, that either PCPs or psych had on benzos. A few months after I started and nearly completed the opiate tapers down to 90 MME/day, I informed all my patients I'd no longer be prescribing opiates to anyone on chronic daily benzos. Since all of these patients have someone else prescribing the benzos, I expect it to take longer. But again, I told them they had 30 days to discuss with their PCP non-benzo alternatives to sleep, anxiety, etc, and then they'll have to be actively tapering off them and that they were encouraged to get second opinion and even change MDs if they disagreed or thought they 'needed' it. This is easy to follow and enforce with the PMP. A few have surprise me and come back a month later and said, "I stopped my xanax already and I'm glad I did." The majority I'm following between now and the end of the year to make sure they're tapering. Most seem to be. Come Nov 1 or so, anyone not showing a meaningful benzo taper, I'll start slowly tapering off the opiates. Nearly every patient has said they feel they need their opiates more that their benzos. Similar to the opiate arm, most of it has gone better than expected, with a few exceptions of patients getting very distressed over it, but reluctantly complying. Again, the reason I'm giving, is the CDC guidelines, opiate epidemic, changing medical standards of care, and bluntly that the combination puts them at risk of accidental overdose and death. Most have replied with, "Well, I've been on this combination for 10 years. If it was so bad I thing it would have hurt me already." Although there may be an element of truth to that, I haven't let it persuade me to change my stance. Again, what's shocked me the most, is that I seem to have lost very few patients over it. What's helping, is that most of the PCPs prescribing the benzos are in my office (multi-specialty group) and they're very much on board with the change (except for one old guy who only works 1.5 days per week).

I'm glad I've done all this and in a weird way, I think a lot of the patients are too. I've had more than a few comment, "Yeah. I've been on these (benzos) forever. I know I need to come off them. It's just that no one ever brought it up."

So very soon, I'll have no-one on high dose opiates (over 90 MME/day) and no-one simultaneously on chronic daily opiates prescribed by other MDs (or myself, which I never did anyways). New patients will be told the same rules: No opiates over 90 MME/day (and no dose escalations, which I rarely if ever do anyways) and any concurrent benzos will need to be tapered starting immediately, that I consider it an absolute contraindication to chronic daily opiate treatment.

That being said, If there are a subset of Pain MDs out there that want to sub specialize in high and very-high dose opiates, that's there prerogative and the patients that feel they need that can go to them because I won't be doing it. And in an era where we have "injection only" docs that don't prescribe over zero MME/day, I think it's completely reasonable to have "low-moderate dose only" Pain MD. Without any convincing literature that high dose or very high dose improves outcomes, I don't think anyone has a very good argument as to why any of us need to be prescribing it. Yes, I realize you could say the same about low and moderate doses, and I'm sure that'll be the CDCs next target. We've go to leave for them something to do in 2018, after all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 7 users
Correct. The very first line says, "This guideline provides recommendations for primary care clinicians who are prescribing opioids for chronic pain outside of active cancer treatment, palliative care, and end-of-life care.
CDC Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain — United States, 2016 | MMWR

After reading these when they first came out, my initial assumption was that they intentionally left open the door for "Pain physicians" to prescribe more in limited cases. Another assumption was that they were leaving the door open for "slightly higher" doses in "limited numbers of cases." Seems logical that if they were okay with PCPs going up to 90 MME/day, that they'd like be okay with Pain Mrs going to 120 MME/day or so. But these are all assumptions. None of it's spelled out, one way or the other. They haven't release any separate or specific "guidelines" for Pain physicians, to my knowledge. I think they're line of thinking is that by shear volume, the vast majority of opiate prescriptions are prescribe by PCPs. This is simply due to there being a much greater number of PCPs. They're likely thinking being that if they can reign in the largest segment first, then reassess and address the smaller subset of Pain specialists after that, while leaving the door cracked open a little bit, for some more aggressive treatment by specialists, preferably board certified specialists, in Pain. This is how I initially interpreted these guidelines.

As time has gone on, and as the regulators have turned up the heat on all of this, I've taken an even more conservative approach. The though process goes something like this: If the regulators don't think its recommended or safe for PCPs to prescribe these drugs at these doses, it stands to reason that it's not safe for anyone to do it, since it's the property of the drugs themselves that create the danger. In other words, if a bad outcome occurred, I don't think it would be a great stretch at all, for the DEA, a licensing board to point to the regulations and say, "The guidelines have been out there. What makes you think you should ignore them? If they make sense for PCPs they make sense for all prescribers" and hold us accountable to them, when it serves their purposes. So, I concluded that there's essentially no risk in following them and some risk (maybe a lot, maybe not) to deviating from them slightly, based on the fact that I'm a specialist in Pain with all the certifications, etc.

So, about 3 months ago I notified all my patients that I'd no longer be prescribing over 90 MME/day, citing the CDC recs, opiate crisis, changing medical standards, etc. I gave them all 30 days to think about it and consider getting a second opinion and switching Pain MD if they disagreed, and let them know that after that we'd start a slow taper. The vast majority of my patients were already at or below 90 MME/day, quite at 0 MME/day. I had a few (maybe 10-12 between 90-120 MME/day) and only 1 or 2 over 120 MME/day that were rocks solid, stable, that I inherited, that had perfect UDS/PMP/no-aberrancy track records. As of today, I've got them all at 90 MME/day except one who I just took down to 120, who was my highest dose patient, and who I'll finish tapering down to 90 in the next 4-8 weeks. As you'd expect, the most difficult have been the ones who were on the highest doses. A couple vowed to change pain docs to find a "high dose opiate specialist" and they all eventually came back because they couldn't find anyone to go over 90 MME/day anyways. So far I'm glad I've done it and it's gone better than expected. It also feels better to think and say, "I don't prescribe high dose opiates. If you need them, you need to find someone who offers that service."

The more difficult task, has been applying the benzo + opiate arm of the guidelines. 1) I don't prescribe any therapeutic benzos (only 1-2 tabs, no refills, for occasional MRI or major procedure). 2) I realized i had more patients that I had thought, on opiates, that either PCPs or psych had on benzos. A few months after I started and nearly completed the opiate tapers down to 90 MME/day, I informed all my patients I'd no longer be prescribing opiates to anyone on chronic daily benzos. Since all of these patients have someone else prescribing the benzos, I expect it to take longer. But again, I told them they had 30 days to discuss with their PCP non-benzo alternatives to sleep, anxiety, etc, and then they'll have to be actively tapering off them and that they were encouraged to get second opinion and even change MDs if they disagreed or thought they 'needed' it. This is easy to follow and enforce with the PMP. A few have surprise me and come back a month later and said, "I stopped my xanax already and I'm glad I did." The majority I'm following between now and the end of the year to make sure they're tapering. Most seem to be. Come Nov 1 or so, anyone not showing a meaningful benzo taper, I'll start slowly tapering off the opiates. Nearly every patient has said they feel they need their opiates more that their benzos. Similar to the opiate arm, most of it has gone better than expected, with a few exceptions of patients getting very distressed over it, but reluctantly complying. Again, the reason I'm giving, is the CDC guidelines, opiate epidemic, changing medical standards of care, and bluntly that the combination puts them at risk of accidental overdose and death. Most have replied with, "Well, I've been on this combination for 10 years. If it was so bad I thing it would have hurt me already." Although there may be an element of truth to that, I haven't let it persuade me to change my stance. Again, what's shocked me the most, is that I seem to have lost very few patients over it. What's helping, is that most of the PCPs prescribing the benzos are in my office (multi-specialty group) and they're very much on board with the change (except for one old guy who only works 1.5 days per week).

I'm glad I've done all this and in a weird way, I think a lot of the patients are too. I've had more than a few comment, "Yeah. I've been on these (benzos) forever. I know I need to come off them. It's just that no one ever brought it up."

So very soon, I'll have no-one on high dose opiates (over 90 MME/day) and no-one simultaneously on chronic daily opiates prescribed by other MDs (or myself, which I never did anyways). New patients will be told the same rules: No opiates over 90 MME/day (and no dose escalations, which I rarely if ever do anyways) and any concurrent benzos will need to be tapered starting immediately, that I consider it an absolute contraindication to chronic daily opiate treatment.

That being said, If there are a subset of Pain MDs out there that want to sub specialize in high and very-high dose opiates, that's there prerogative and the patients that feel they need that can go to them because I won't be doing it. And in an era where we have "injection only" docs that don't prescribe over zero MME/day, I think it's completely reasonable to have "low-moderate dose only" Pain MD. Without any convincing literature that high dose or very high dose improves outcomes, I don't think anyone has a very good argument as to why any of us need to be prescribing it. Yes, I realize you could say the same about low and moderate doses, and I'm sure that'll be the CDCs next target. We've go to leave for them something to do in 2018, after all.

Awesome.and inspirational post.

Quick question, I presume then that you also tapered your cancer/palliative care patients to below 90 as well?
 
I say this a little tongue in cheek, but I think it is important. Lack of evidence does not equal evidence of lacking.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Since no one has done the prospective double blind study needed to show long term efficacy, we revert to the next level of evidence- the effect of withdrawal of opioids gradually. Several studies show an improvement in pain on withdrawal of chronically prescribed opioids. Until there are definitive studies that otherwise demonstrate sustained efficacy without dosage escalation in opioids, I must presume most patients taking opioids are simply iatrogenically chemically dependent, and therefore cannot justify starting any new patient on long term opioids. What I see in the heroin population is that there is no euphoria or effect of heroin at all, even at high doses when taken chronically. They all take heroin to avoid withdrawal symptoms. Similarly, it is my belief that most chronic pain patients take opioids to avoid withdrawal symptoms (including acute escalation of pain, prompting them to believe they need the opioids for pain control). Heroin addicts and patients taking chronically prescribed opioids for pain are largely physiologically equivalent- the only difference is the drug dealer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
Since no one has done the prospective double blind study needed to show long term efficacy, we revert to the next level of evidence- the effect of withdrawal of opioids gradually. Several studies show an improvement in pain on withdrawal of chronically prescribed opioids. Until there are definitive studies that otherwise demonstrate sustained efficacy without dosage escalation in opioids, I must presume most patients taking opioids are simply iatrogenically chemically dependent, and therefore cannot justify starting any new patient on long term opioids. What I see in the heroin population is that there is no euphoria or effect of heroin at all, even at high doses when taken chronically. They all take heroin to avoid withdrawal symptoms. Similarly, it is my belief that most chronic pain patients take opioids to avoid withdrawal symptoms (including acute escalation of pain, prompting them to believe they need the opioids for pain control). Heroin addicts and patients taking chronically prescribed opioids for pain are largely physiologically equivalent- the only difference is the drug dealer.

What are the long term studies beyond 1 year for Lyrica, Cymbalta, NSAIDs and/or any other medication used to treat chronic pain?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Awesome.and inspirational post.

Quick question, I presume then that you also tapered your cancer/palliative care patients to below 90 as well?

The CDC guidelines with respect to maximal daily dose of systemic opioids and concurrent benzo and opioid prescriptions do NOT apply to cancer/palliative care patients. That subset of patients is an entirely different animal from a therapeutic standpoint. You throw the kitchen sink at stage 4 cancer patients to keep them as comfortable as possible, because they’re dying. Opioids are titrated to effect and it’s acceptable to prescribe benzo and opioids for metastatic cancer patients. The risk/benefit analysis in cancer pain is radically different from benign chronic pain.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Awesome.and inspirational post.

Quick question, I presume then that you also tapered your cancer/palliative care patients to below 90 as well?
Awesome.and inspirational post.

Quick question, I presume then that you also tapered your cancer/palliative care patients to below 90 as well?
Thanks.
That whole post applied to chronic non-cancer patients, only. I think end of life patients deserve a different rule book. That being said, the heme onc docs around me do almost all their own opiate management, so I don't really see that much end-of-life cancer pain. But I think if you're dying of cancer, you get a different rule book.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
I say this a little tongue in cheek, but I think it is important. Lack of evidence does not equal evidence of lacking.
True. Lack of evidence means we use clinical judgement on a case by case basis. So you can bend and shape your own judgement in whatever direction you want.
 
Since no one has done the prospective double blind study needed to show long term efficacy, we revert to the next level of evidence- the effect of withdrawal of opioids gradually. Several studies show an improvement in pain on withdrawal of chronically prescribed opioids. Until there are definitive studies that otherwise demonstrate sustained efficacy without dosage escalation in opioids, I must presume most patients taking opioids are simply iatrogenically chemically dependent, and therefore cannot justify starting any new patient on long term opioids. What I see in the heroin population is that there is no euphoria or effect of heroin at all, even at high doses when taken chronically. They all take heroin to avoid withdrawal symptoms. Similarly, it is my belief that most chronic pain patients take opioids to avoid withdrawal symptoms (including acute escalation of pain, prompting them to believe they need the opioids for pain control). Heroin addicts and patients taking chronically prescribed opioids for pain are largely physiologically equivalent- the only difference is the drug dealer.
Agree. I haven't started an opiate naive patient on opiates in years now. Essentially every opiate Rx I currently write is for legacy patients that someone else started on opiates.
 
What are the long term studies beyond 1 year for Lyrica, Cymbalta, NSAIDs and/or any other medication used to treat chronic pain?
No better.
There's no many long term studies on most drugs. Drug companies won't fund 10 year studies if they can get you to bite with one that lasted only 12 weeks.
 
The CDC guidelines with respect to maximal daily dose of systemic opioids and concurrent benzo and opioid prescriptions do NOT apply to cancer/palliative care patients. That subset of patients is an entirely different animal from a therapeutic standpoint. You throw the kitchen sink at stage 4 cancer patients to keep them as comfortable as possible, because they’re dying. Opioids are titrated to effect and it’s acceptable to prescribe benzo and opioids for metastatic cancer patients. The risk/benefit analysis in cancer pain is radically different from benign chronic pain.
Agree.
 
Agree. I haven't started an opiate naive patient on opiates in years now. Essentially every opiate Rx I currently write is for legacy patients that someone else started on opiates.

Nice. How do u still get referrals from the guys who send u stuff expecting opiates?
 
So if you are a pain doc, are you off the hook if you prescribe > 90 MED for several patients (obviously documenting appropriate diagnosis and reasoning why) ?


Good luck if u decide to go and try...

IMO, the only docs that should be prescribing high dose opioids are palliative pain docs or us, when we are treating palliative pain patients...


Oh and [/sarcasm on] certain individuals like Dr. Tennant....
 
There's an interesting discussion of this on Practical Pain Management by a lawyer who specializes in pain and opioid issues:
A Legal Interpretation of the CDC Opioid Prescribing Guidelines

My reading of the CDC guidelines and the discussion around them is that they were not intended to keep people from prescribing high dose opioids, especially for legacy patients, but they also do nothing to create a "safe haven" for high dose prescribing. Other agencies are taking these recommendations as rules now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Good luck if u decide to go and try...

IMO, the only docs that should be prescribing high dose opioids are palliative pain docs or us, when we are treating palliative pain patients...


Oh and [/sarcasm on] certain individuals like Dr. Tennant....

Nope, definitely not going to try to.

My main concern are patients who come to me on >90 MEqs...do we continue or just automatically have 0 tolerance policy and start a taper....

But emd123 has shown that it is possible to get everyone below 90...so why not.
 
Since no one has done the prospective double blind study needed to show long term efficacy, we revert to the next level of evidence- the effect of withdrawal of opioids gradually. Several studies show an improvement in pain on withdrawal of chronically prescribed opioids. Until there are definitive studies that otherwise demonstrate sustained efficacy without dosage escalation in opioids, I must presume most patients taking opioids are simply iatrogenically chemically dependent, and therefore cannot justify starting any new patient on long term opioids. What I see in the heroin population is that there is no euphoria or effect of heroin at all, even at high doses when taken chronically. They all take heroin to avoid withdrawal symptoms. Similarly, it is my belief that most chronic pain patients take opioids to avoid withdrawal symptoms (including acute escalation of pain, prompting them to believe they need the opioids for pain control). Heroin addicts and patients taking chronically prescribed opioids for pain are largely physiologically equivalent- the only difference is the drug dealer.

That is not my understanding of what's going on with these heroin addicts. I'm pretty sure they're still getting high even after years of use
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Nice. How do u still get referrals from the guys who send u stuff expecting opiates?
Like I said, I'll rx opiates to patients with legitimate medical need if they're already on them, if they meet my criteria and with many restrictions and exclusions. But I don't start truly opiate naive patients on them. The opiate naive patients aren't the ones wanting opiates. It's the people already on them. When the referrers send patients hoping you'll Rx opiates, its almost always someone already on them. Just think about it. The patients pissed of that you won't write them opiates are almost never patients who've never had them. It's almost always someone that's been on them, and is having a hard time finding someone to keep them on them. So, it hasn't created any significant conflict with referrers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
That is not my understanding of what's going on with these heroin addicts. I'm pretty sure they're still getting high even after years of use
I tend to agree with algos on this one. I used to see a lot of heroin addicts in the ED. It was never my impression they were ever having much fun with anything. They generally just seemed obsessed with avoiding 'dope sickness,' as they called it. I'm sure it feels good to them for a short period of time to get their fix and feel the withdrawal pains melt away, but it's my impression they're generally never getting that initial high they had the first few times. But then again, I don't know for sure. I could be wrong. I don't hang out with that crew.

Speaking of that, remember opiophile.org?

Gone.
 
No better.
There's no many long term studies on most drugs. Drug companies won't fund 10 year studies if they can get you to bite with one that lasted only 12 weeks.

So isn't it a little dishonest to only claim there is "no long term evidence that opioids help chronic pain". By that logic, there is no long term evidence any medication current used on the market works to help chronic pain.

Why say that in isolation?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
So isn't it a little dishonest to only claim there is "no long term evidence that opioids help chronic pain". By that logic, there is no long term evidence any medication current used on the market works to help chronic pain.

Why say that in isolation?

prolia has 10 year data on bmd.
 
Several studies show an improvement in pain on withdrawal of chronically prescribed opioids...I must presume most patients taking opioids are simply iatrogenically chemically dependent

Do you have those references around? I have been looking for some stuff on pain/threshold/timing.

We've been doing a lot more work with this micro/low-dosing intrathecal paradigm where you wean folks off their systemic opioids, and patients at 6 - 8 weeks off their opioids are markedly worse in function, pain scores, QOLs. I understand chemical dependence can take a while to reset, and opioid abstinence syndrome can last for a long time, but I don't think this is just iatrogenic chemical dependence for folks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
if my recollection serves correct, during a dannemiller talk, Bogduk was one of those who noted that patients were improved significantly off opioids.
 
Do you have those references around? I have been looking for some stuff on pain/threshold/timing.

We've been doing a lot more work with this micro/low-dosing intrathecal paradigm where you wean folks off their systemic opioids, and patients at 6 - 8 weeks off their opioids are markedly worse in function, pain scores, QOLs. I understand chemical dependence can take a while to reset, and opioid abstinence syndrome can last for a long time, but I don't think this is just iatrogenic chemical dependence for folks.
part of the issue is also patient reluctance.

I can tell you from my clinical experience is in many ways the exact opposite of yours, and its due to human nature (and dependence). people who never wanted to reduce their opioids will always spout poetic about how great things were when they were on the meds. so many complaints about how they cant vacuum or rake leaves any more.

yet most of them hadn't been doing those very activities for years on the meds, only thought they were doing so. im fairly certain the ones you are talking to who are complaining will complain until they get back on the meds, then they will have a short window of joy, then return to their baseline grumpy state, requesting more meds, because what you put them back on wasn't quite enough.

fwiw, the ones I taper off completely do better than the ones that are reduced to a "safe dose"...

establish an interest in tapering before doing so. engage them, and less of "you have no choice, im tapering you" to "lets do this together, for your health". the ones who ive done this with almost to a person are much happier and have better QOL after tapering off (maybe because they are willing to consider developing better coping mechanisms.)
 
I will post as a separate topic the literature supporting withdrawal of opioids, but my own clinical experience was with 100 patients that were withdrawn from an average of 350mg MED down to an average of 108 MED over a period of 4 months and there was no changes in VAS scores or functionality assessment.
 
I will post as a separate topic the literature supporting withdrawal of opioids, but my own clinical experience was with 100 patients that were withdrawn from an average of 350mg MED down to an average of 108 MED over a period of 4 months and there was no changes in VAS scores or functionality assessment.
My residency pain training was in a liberalish opioid clinic.
We would increase people's long acting if they said there pain was not controlled...and they NEVER took less short acting at the next f/u
Really made me think...even back then
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I will post as a separate topic the literature supporting withdrawal of opioids, but my own clinical experience was with 100 patients that were withdrawn from an average of 350mg MED down to an average of 108 MED over a period of 4 months and there was no changes in VAS scores or functionality assessment.
Please post this algos
Thnx
 
So isn't it a little dishonest to only claim there is "no long term evidence that opioids help chronic pain". By that logic, there is no long term evidence any medication current used on the market works to help chronic pain.

Why say that in isolation?
Not 'dishonest' in the slightest. We were not talking about "every drug in existence," so, no, it's not dishonest. We were only talking about opiates. You are correct, that long term studies are hard to find for most drugs. And if you used that as a reason to question the long term use of any other such drug without great long term studies to back it up, I'd say, "Go right ahead." But let's not pretend we're comparing apples to apples. Opiates have a much greater downside than the vast majority of drugs, when they go bad. So it's not the same to compare the long term use of lidoderm patches, to the long term use of Opana ER. Ever read a news report of someone shooting a pharmacist to get his fill of lidoderm patches, or a 28-year-old mother of two in rehab because flexeril ruined her life?

Let's not pretend "opiates are just like other drugs." They're not. Pretending that, and listening to those that pushed that idea in the 1990s & 1980s, is how we got in this mess.

#HonestTalk
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Not 'dishonest' in the slightest. We were not talking about "every drug in existence," so, no, it's not dishonest. We were only talking about opiates. You are correct, that long term studies are hard to find for most drugs. And if you used that as a reason to question the long term use of any other such drug without great long term studies to back it up, I'd say, "Go right ahead." But let's not pretend we're comparing apples to apples. Opiates have a much greater downside than the vast majority of drugs, when they go bad. So it's not the same to compare the long term use of lidoderm patches, to the long term use of Opana ER. Ever read a news report of someone shooting a pharmacist to get his fill of lidoderm patches, or a 28-year-old mother of two in rehab because flexeril ruined her life?

Let's not pretend "opiates are just like other drugs." They're not. Pretending that, and listening to those that pushed that idea in the 1990s & 1980s, is how we got in this mess.

#HonestTalk

What is the overall mortality rate yearly from legally prescribed opiates compared to NSAIDs that are legally obtained?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
when comparing opioids vs NSAID, as when comparing opioids and alcohol, the key distinction is that the latter in both cases can be legally obtained without involvement of the physician, or the DEA.
 
when comparing opioids vs NSAID, as when comparing opioids and alcohol, the key distinction is that the latter in both cases can be legally obtained without involvement of the physician, or the DEA.

But you did not answer the question.

Looks like 16-20000 NSAID deaths from MI/CVA/GI bleed and 5000 opiate for Rx to the patient prescribed. Would need more data that has not been gathered. Also would want suicide info for opiates.
 
But you did not answer the question.

Looks like 16-20000 NSAID deaths from MI/CVA/GI bleed and 5000 opiate for Rx to the patient prescribed. Would need more data that has not been gathered. Also would want suicide info for opiates.

Ahh so more than 4 times the deaths of legally obtained NSAIDs than legally obtained opioids per year.

Curious to know why we dont ban NSAIDs since they seem to cause more mortality?

Considering there is a lack of long term studies confirming the benefits of NSAIDs with 4 times the mortality rate, why not ban all NSAIDs first?
 
some of the reasons:
- because opioids are addictive and NSAID are not.
- because the vast majority of NSAID are sold OTC and not via prescription.
- because when people OD on NSAID, typically nothing happens besides some gastric distress, and there is significantly less potential for OD death than with opioids.
- because the risk to the rest of the community is higher with opioids than with NSAID. esp kids, who do not become NSAID addicts when they raid family medicine cabinets.
- because opioids are not regulated by DEA or DOH. because there is no black market for opioids.

I could go on and on and on........




fwiw, this is a strawman argument, arguing we should ban something else - in this case, NSAID - because it might have increased risks compared to opioids. NSAID use is not directly related to opioid use.

lets go out on an extreme, and postulate a different strawman argument and argue, since we have to monitor closely how we prescribe opioids, we should more closely monitor who we allow to buy guns, as there are 31000 gun related fatalities in the US. Right? Or, one will argue not inappropriately - not related.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
What is the overall mortality rate yearly from legally prescribed opiates compared to NSAIDs that are legally obtained?
It's high. They're both too high. And if you want to use that argument to prescribe less NSAIDs, too, I think that's a sound and logical argument. You'll have my attention, with that one. But if you're line of reasoning, "Opiates are bad for people. NSAIDs are just as bad. Therefore we should prescribe people lots of both NSAIDs and opiates", then you've lost me. We should be trying to find reasons to be cautious about both. We should not be looking for reasons to be cavalier about such adverse side effects.

But don't get me wrong. I'm not saying we shouldn't ever prescribe anyone an opiate, nsaid or any other drug with potential side effects. We just have to be very aware of the downsides. And make good choices.
 
Ahh so more than 4 times the deaths of legally obtained NSAIDs than legally obtained opioids per year.

Curious to know why we dont ban NSAIDs since they seem to cause more mortality?

Considering there is a lack of long term studies confirming the benefits of NSAIDs with 4 times the mortality rate, why not ban all NSAIDs first?

It's all about risk/benefit and number needed to treat, and number needed to harm.

It's not all black and white, "This drug, good. That drug, bad."

But if you want to take look at taking some nsaids off the market?
Fine.
You'll have many allies and you won't get much argument from me.
Vioxx already has been spiked. Same with bextra and bromfenac.
Many others are just as bad as these but have better lobbyists working to protect them.

Just don't take the original nsaid aspirin since it's reductions in death from MI are historic and better than even tPA.

And don't take Ibuprofen, since it's just about the only thing I ever take for pain and has never hurt my GI track, heart or kidneys.

But if you wanted to start picking off the ones with the worst track record and start a campaign, then go ahead. You won't get any argument from me.

But none of that, N O N E of that, makes the risks of opiates, any less. Don't fall into that trap.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Top