McClatchy Newspaper Article

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

ampaphb

Interventional Spine
15+ Year Member
Joined
May 13, 2007
Messages
4,352
Reaction score
738
Treatment for pain divides physicians
By Jim Warren
McClatchy Newspapers - 08/16/2008

LEXINGTON, Ky. — Many doctors are wrestling with questions of how and when to treat thousands of legitimate patients who need those same drugs.

It’s all part of perhaps the hottest national debate in medicine today.

The discussion revolves around two camps. One holds that pain essentially is an illness in its own right that should be treated aggressively, up to and including the use of powerful narcotic drugs. The other side contends that doctors must be much more conservative, offering narcotics only when they’re absolutely sure patients actually need the potentially addicting drugs and are not seeking them to abuse them.

Some nationally known experts, like Dr. Russell Portenoy, a New York pain specialist, say the debate has left many doctors reluctant to prescribe narcotics because they fear being investigated by authorities and many patients reluctant to seek help because they fear being seen as “pill users.”

“The drugs are highly stigmatized,” Portenoy said in an interview. “Doctors who prescribe them are stigmatized by their colleagues; patients who use them are stigmatized by their families, their friends and by other doctors.”

‘Pill mills’

The debate is followed closely by many physicians in Kentucky, where prescription drug abuse is a perennial problem and where several doctors have gone to jail in recent years for running highly profitable “pill mills” that cranked out prescriptions to those who abused or sold them.

Authorities say recent enforcement efforts have cut down on such problems in Kentucky, but also have prompted lawbreakers to seek new, out-of-state drug sources. Drug enforcement officers in Eastern and southeastern Kentucky are continuing investigations into traffickers who travel as far as Pennsylvania, Florida and Michigan for prescription narcotics they sell back home.

The pain pill issue surfaced again last month after the Kentucky Board of Medical Licensure suspended Dr. James Heaphy and Dr. Charles Grigsby, both of Lexington, for allegedly overprescribing controlled drugs.
The board said the case against Heaphy, whose license to practice medicine was suspended, includes questions about medical records that appeared to have been falsified or altered.

Grigsby can still practice medicine, but he is prohibited from prescribing controlled drugs.

Both Grigsby and Heaphy have hired attorneys and say they will fight to be reinstated.

Some critics contend that such medical board actions have left many Kentucky doctors leery of prescribing narcotics for patients who really need them.

Dr. Preston Nunnelley, the medical board’s president, says he’s aware that some physicians are fearful, and that he’s heard from some of them. But he maintains that doctors who prescribe narcotics for pain have nothing to fear from the board as long as they stick to the rules.

The board upgraded its prescription guidelines in 2003 “so that physicians could prescribe without fear,” he said. “All we’re asking is that they follow the guidelines.”

Just about everybody involved agrees that pain is a serious national health problem.

Pain problem

It is estimated that between 40 million and 80 million Americans suffer from chronic pain — defined as pain that lingers for six months or more — and that many are at least partially disabled as a result. By some estimates, the problem costs America $100 billion a year in medical costs and lost productivity.

Nevertheless, experts such as Dr. Barry Cole, executive director of the American Society of Pain Educators, say millions of sufferers don’t get proper relief.

The reasons, Cole says, include lack of health insurance, which hinders patients in getting treatment, and doctors who are either afraid to prescribe the necessary drugs or who lack the training to dispense them properly.

“Basically, about every sixth American suffers from pain every day,” Cole said in an interview. “If this were cancer, if this were heart disease, if this were HIV, it would be considered the No. 1 health concern in the country. That’s the insanity of all this.”

Dr. William O. Witt, chairman emeritus of anesthesiology at the University of Kentucky, says physicians agree that it is proper to prescribe powerful narcotic drugs to treat patients with acute post-surgical pain or pain from illnesses such as cancer.

The debate, Witt said, is about using those drugs to treat patients suffering from chronic, ongoing pain that can stem from many sources, some that are not easily diagnosed.

Witt says he doesn’t fault doctors who prescribe narcotics for chronic pain, but he doesn’t prescribe them himself because scientific evidence is lacking.

“There are virtually no studies that show improved function and pain relief from these drugs beyond six months,” he said. “We’re also starting to recognize that when you give these drugs at high dosages over a long period, they actually start to produce pain.”

Witt also contends that the risk of addiction can be high — “There’s a reason these drugs are controlled,” he said — and that other, non-narcotic approaches are available to help patients with severe long-term pain.
“Here at the university we don’t use opioids (narcotics) for chronic pain at all, and we treat lots of pain patients very effectively,” Witt said.

Narcotic alternatives

Alternative methods include non-narcotic drugs, physical exercise and electrical impulse devices to ease pain, he said.

On the other side of the argument are doctors such as Portenoy, chairman of pain medicine and palliative care at Beth Israel Medical Center in New York, who think narcotics can be safely and effectively prescribed for chronic pain. Portenoy agrees, however, that supporting scientific evidence still is lacking in many areas.

“Having said that ... it’s now the consensus in the pain specialty community that opioids are appropriate for a carefully selected subpopulation of chronic pain patients who can benefit with tolerable side effects and with no problems of abuse,” Portenoy said.

Identifying those patients, however, isn’t easy.

For one thing, most patients with chronic pain end up seeking help from primary care physicians because there are only about 10,000 to 12,000 pain specialists to serve the entire country.

Barbara Hunter, a Lexington attorney who represents people with disabilities, also points out that patients who lack health insurance often can’t get in to see pain management specialists.

Pain game

But primary care doctors might lack the time — and the training — to adequately evaluate patients seeking help with chronic pain.

Add in the possibility that some of those patients might be faking to get drugs for abuse or resale, and the risk of doctors being duped is high.

In one case reported in Florida earlier this year, a pain doctor who is meticulous about screening patients was fooled by an 80-year-old woman who sold the drugs to supplement her husband’s monthly Social Security check.

Even experienced doctors can be taken in, says Dr. Roger Humphries, chairman of emergency medicine at the University of Kentucky. He says that leaves doctors in a ticklish situation.

“It can be very confusing to sort through who is there for an acute pain condition, who’s there for a chronic pain condition, and who is there for something that is more of a drug addiction problem,” Humphries said. “Very often, we have to give the patient the benefit of the doubt. It’s an issue emergency physicians struggle with daily.”

Humphries said he would “rather be duped by someone seeking narcotics ... than to neglect to give medications to someone who really needs them.”

Nunnelley, the medical board chairman, said he agrees that physicians can be duped. But he says doctors can avoid trouble with the medical board if they follow its prescription guidelines, which require doctors to do such things as perform periodic patient checkups, and have patients sign agreements to follow directions and not seek drugs from multiple doctors.

“I can tell you, speaking as the president of the board, that we’re not going after anybody who is in compliance with these guidelines,” Nunnelley said.

In addition, Nunnelley says the medical board is taking other steps to educate and reassure Kentucky doctors, including meeting with physician groups and urging doctors to call the board if they have questions about prescriptions.

He added that he thinks Kentucky’s recent prescription abuse problems are coming under control because of the board’s efforts and because of KASPER, the state model computer system that tracks prescriptions.
“I recently had a physician come to see me who said he was nervous about continuing to treat chronic pain patients,” Nunnelley said. “I gave him a copy of our guidelines and said, ‘sign contracts with your patients and we’re not going to do anything to you as long as you’re doing that.’”


Members don't see this ad.
 
Interesting article. It was followed up about a week later with an article about the opioid problem in eastern Kentucky. We just walked by with the sarcastic "wow, groundbreaking news!!" comments.

Narcs are a big deal out here. They fuel the eastern kentucky economy. That and Social Security Disability. To this day, my all-time favorite line: "So, why are you on disability?" "It's been so long, I don't remember." :rolleyes:

Gotta be careful with how things are worded, though. Sounds like he's throwing other docs under the bus. "I don't prescribe narcotics in chronic pain because there's no good scientific evidence to do so, therefore they are not indicated. But I don't criticize other docs who do." :confused:
 
sounds easy enough. have the patients sign narcotic non-abuse contracts. don't think it'll stop any abuse of the narcotics at all, but if that'll save my butt from scrutiny from the board, then fine. i wish they'd give more details when they report a physician getting busted for narcotic prescription. like, doctor rosen was requiring each patient to pay a $250 visit fee every 6 months and they'd get a 6-month supply of oxycodone, soma, and valium. and no physical (except the weak initial one), no cycling, no imaging, no alternatives tried (chiropractic, interventional, neurosurg consult, PT, acupuncture) or even offered. THEN, we could all see that we're really in no risk of getting busted for giving an old 80-year-old woman some percocets for her back and shoulder pain.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Witt is not being truthful at all. He has over 200 intrathecal narcotic pump patients in his practice he implanted. His assertion that he doesn't use narcotics at all is very misleading. Doctors that implant pumps containing narcotics while chastizing the use of oral opiates are unfortunately using a sledge hammer as a treatment modality while denying patients other (oral narcotic) much less expensive or invasive alternatives. Witt also is a strong proponent of ultra low dose intrathecal opiates claiming that morphine (he does not use other intrathecal opiates in his practice) when given at very low doses with the catheter tip at T11 does not circulate to the brain due to the direction of CSF circulation. This assertion as far as I know remains unproven and it is not clear to me that one can direct the flow of morphine caudally. I have been unable to find any studies demonstrating gradient concentrations of ultra low dose morphine in the CSF. To be a candidate for pump implantation, the patient has to be off all opiates for 6 weeks, then receives a pump delivering 0.05mg a day morphine. There have been no placebo controlled studies of this practice. After a year or two, the dosage is escalated from 400 to at least 3500% in case studies....not really too different than what we see at higher initial doses of the drug. Some of the dangers of ultra low dose intrathecal morphine are: 1. are the patients who have been withdrawn from all narcotics for 6 weeks using the prospect of the intrathecal pump implant as an inducement for pain relief and therefore promoting unnecessary pump implants? 2. since there is no placebo control, we don't know how much of the pain relief is all in their head 3. insurers, already looking for ways to cut expenditures, may view this unproven uncommon usage of intrathecal drug delivery as a sham therapy that could easily be obtained through oral medications, and may now begin to view this very expensive therapy of intrathecal pumps as more marginal.
 
Agree with the observations on Witt. The only time I heard him talk half of the lecture was about him.

Interesting study in Sept Pain Medicine on prosecutions of physicians for improper opioid prescribing. As I keep trying to tell people, the DEA agents are not hiding in the bushes outside your office waiting to pounce.

http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/120848348/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0
 
gorback,
i got error msgs when trying to access the link you posted (both with internet explorer and firefox browsers).

looks to be password protected.
 
Physicians Charged with Opioid Analgesic-Prescribing Offenses

Donald M. Goldenbaum, PhD,* Myra Christopher, BA,* Rollin M. Gallagher, MD, MPH, † Scott Fishman, MD, ‡ Richard Payne, MD, § David Joranson, MSSW, ¶ Drew Edmondson, JD,** Judith McKee, JD, MA, †† and Arthur Thexton, JD, MA ‡‡
*Center for Practical Bioethics, Kansas City, Missouri; † Philadelphia VA Medical Center/University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; ‡ University of California-Davis, Davis, California; § Duke University Divinity School, Durham, North Carolina; ¶ University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin; **Attorney General, State of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma; †† National Association of Attorneys General, Washington, D.C.; ‡‡ Wisconsin Department of Regulation & Licensing, Madison, Wisconsin, USA
Correspondence to Donald M. Goldenbaum, PhD, Director, Research, Evaluation, and Publications Program, Center for Practical Bioethics, 1111 Main, Suite 500, Kansas City, MO 64105-2116, USA. Tel: 800-344-3829; Fax: 816-221-2002; E-mail: [email protected].
Copyright © 2008 by American Academy of Pain Medicine
KEYWORDS
Physicians • Opioids • Prescribing • Prosecution • Criminal • Charges
ABSTRACT

Objective. To provide a "big picture" overview of the characteristics and outcomes of recent criminal and administrative cases in which physicians have been criminally prosecuted or charged by medical boards with offenses related to inappropriate prescribing of opioid analgesics.

Design. We identified as many criminal and administrative cases of these types as possible that occurred between 1998 and 2006. Cases were identified using a wide variety of sources, including organizational and government agency databases, published news accounts, and Web sites. Factual characteristics of these cases and their outcomes, and of the physicians involved, were then further researched using additional sources and methods.

Setting. Study findings are intended to apply to practicing U.S. patient care physicians as a whole.

Patients or Other Participants. There were no patients or participants in this study.

Outcome Measures. We analyzed the numbers and types of cases and physicians involved, criminal and administrative charges brought, case outcomes and sanctions, specialties, and other characteristics of the physicians involved.

Results. The study identified 725 doctors, representing an estimated 0.1% of practicing patient care physicians, who were charged between 1998 and 2006 with criminal and/or administrative offenses related to prescribing opioid analgesics. A plurality of these (39.3%) were General Practice/Family Medicine physicians, compared with 3.5% who were self-identified or board-certified pain specialists. Physicians in this sample were more likely to be male, older, and not board certified (P < 0.001). Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) criminal and complaint investigations averaged 658 per year (2003–2006) and "for cause" surrenders of DEA registrations averaged 369.7 (2000–2006).

Conclusions. Criminal or administrative charges and sanctions for prescribing opioid analgesics are rare. In addition, there appears to be little objective basis for concern that pain specialists have been "singled out" for prosecution or administrative sanctioning for such offenses.
 
39.3% GP, 3.5% pain = 11:1 ratio. I bet the ratio of GP : Pain docs in the country is much higher, meaning pain docs did indeed get charged more often. Another way to look at that is I think the data would show that a higher % of pain docs (#charged/# in practice across the country) were targeted than GPs.
 
Last edited:
3.5% "self-identified or board-certified", so we need to see the full article. Hopefully they broke down that 3.5% into board-certified vs self-identified. Also we need to see what they mean by board-certified - was that ACGME, ABPM or the bogus AAPManagement exam?
 
Top