Primary care-based interventions for secondary prevention of opioid dependence in chronic non-cancer pain patients on pharmaceutical opioids: systematic review.
Clare French, David M Troy, Sarah Dawson, Michael Dalili, Matthew Hickman, Kyla Thomas
{"title":"Primary care-based interventions for secondary prevention of opioid dependence in chronic non-cancer pain patients on pharmaceutical opioids: systematic review.","authors":"Clare French, David M Troy, Sarah Dawson, Michael Dalili, Matthew Hickman, Kyla Thomas","doi":"10.3399/BJGPO.2024.0122","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Globally almost one third of adults with chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) are prescribed opioids. Prevention of opioid dependence among these patients is a public health priority.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>Synthesise the evidence on the effectiveness of primary care-based interventions for secondary prevention of opioid dependence in CNCP patients on pharmaceutical opioids.</p><p><strong>Design & setting: </strong>Systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and comparative non-randomised studies of interventions from high-income countries.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We searched five databases for studies on non-tapering secondary prevention interventions such as tools for predicting dependence, screening tools for early recognition of dependence, prescribing/medication monitoring, and specialist support. We examined multiple outcomes, including reduction in opioid dosage. Primary analyses were restricted to RCTs with data synthesised using an effect direction plot. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias (RoB2) tool.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 7,102 identified reports, 18 studies were eligible (8 RCTs). Most used multiple interventions/components. Of the seven RCTs at low risk of bias or 'some concerns', five showed a positive intervention effect on at least one relevant outcome, four of which included a nurse care manager and/or other specialist support. The remaining two RCTs showed no positive effect of automated symptom monitoring and optimised analgesic management by a nurse care manager/physician pain specialist team, or of a mobile opioid management app.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We identify a clear need for further adequately powered high quality studies. The conclusions that can be drawn on intervention effectiveness are limited by the sparsity and inconsistency of available data.</p>","PeriodicalId":36541,"journal":{"name":"BJGP Open","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BJGP Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGPO.2024.0122","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PRIMARY HEALTH CARE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Globally almost one third of adults with chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) are prescribed opioids. Prevention of opioid dependence among these patients is a public health priority.
Aim: Synthesise the evidence on the effectiveness of primary care-based interventions for secondary prevention of opioid dependence in CNCP patients on pharmaceutical opioids.
Design & setting: Systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and comparative non-randomised studies of interventions from high-income countries.
Method: We searched five databases for studies on non-tapering secondary prevention interventions such as tools for predicting dependence, screening tools for early recognition of dependence, prescribing/medication monitoring, and specialist support. We examined multiple outcomes, including reduction in opioid dosage. Primary analyses were restricted to RCTs with data synthesised using an effect direction plot. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias (RoB2) tool.
Results: Of 7,102 identified reports, 18 studies were eligible (8 RCTs). Most used multiple interventions/components. Of the seven RCTs at low risk of bias or 'some concerns', five showed a positive intervention effect on at least one relevant outcome, four of which included a nurse care manager and/or other specialist support. The remaining two RCTs showed no positive effect of automated symptom monitoring and optimised analgesic management by a nurse care manager/physician pain specialist team, or of a mobile opioid management app.
Conclusion: We identify a clear need for further adequately powered high quality studies. The conclusions that can be drawn on intervention effectiveness are limited by the sparsity and inconsistency of available data.