Identifying opioid misuse in cancer pain: validation of the prescription opioid misuse index in a multicenter study.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Virginie Guastella, Mélanie Bianchi, Eliane Hanniet, Bruno Pereira, Nicolas Authier
{"title":"Identifying opioid misuse in cancer pain: validation of the prescription opioid misuse index in a multicenter study.","authors":"Virginie Guastella, Mélanie Bianchi, Eliane Hanniet, Bruno Pereira, Nicolas Authier","doi":"10.1007/s00520-025-09942-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The prevalence of analgesic opioid (AO) misuse among patients with cancer-related chronic pain remains poorly understood, and no screening tool has been validated for this population. The Prescription Opioid Misuse Index (POMI), an eight-item self-administered questionnaire, was developed for chronic non-cancer pain. This study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of the POMI in a population of patients with chronic cancer-related pain.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This prospective observational psychometric study was conducted in two oncology day hospitals at the Clermont-Ferrand University Hospital. Eligible patients had active cancer, chronic pain lasting ≥ 3 months and were receiving daily opioid therapy. The POMI questionnaire was completed at inclusion (TEST) and 2 weeks later (RETEST). Psychometric properties were assessed following standard guidelines, including internal consistency, test-retest reliability and external validity using DSM-5 criteria for opioid use disorder as the reference standard.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 138 patients were included (58% men), with a mean age of 64 ± 10 years. Internal consistency of the POMI was low (Kuder-Richardson coefficient: 0.22). Test-retest reliability, assessed in 68 patients, showed moderate agreement (Lin's concordance: 0.43 [0.24-0.63]). Correlation between POMI scores and DSM-5 criteria was modest (Spearman's ρ = 0.25). According to the POMI, 11.6% of patients demonstrated opioid misuse versus 17.4% with DSM-5-defined use disorder.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The POMI lacks sufficient psychometric validity for use in oncology populations. Future tools should be specifically designed to address the clinical complexity and unique context of chronic cancer-related pain and opioid use.</p>","PeriodicalId":22046,"journal":{"name":"Supportive Care in Cancer","volume":"33 10","pages":"902"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12494673/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Supportive Care in Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-025-09942-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: The prevalence of analgesic opioid (AO) misuse among patients with cancer-related chronic pain remains poorly understood, and no screening tool has been validated for this population. The Prescription Opioid Misuse Index (POMI), an eight-item self-administered questionnaire, was developed for chronic non-cancer pain. This study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of the POMI in a population of patients with chronic cancer-related pain.

Methods: This prospective observational psychometric study was conducted in two oncology day hospitals at the Clermont-Ferrand University Hospital. Eligible patients had active cancer, chronic pain lasting ≥ 3 months and were receiving daily opioid therapy. The POMI questionnaire was completed at inclusion (TEST) and 2 weeks later (RETEST). Psychometric properties were assessed following standard guidelines, including internal consistency, test-retest reliability and external validity using DSM-5 criteria for opioid use disorder as the reference standard.

Results: A total of 138 patients were included (58% men), with a mean age of 64 ± 10 years. Internal consistency of the POMI was low (Kuder-Richardson coefficient: 0.22). Test-retest reliability, assessed in 68 patients, showed moderate agreement (Lin's concordance: 0.43 [0.24-0.63]). Correlation between POMI scores and DSM-5 criteria was modest (Spearman's ρ = 0.25). According to the POMI, 11.6% of patients demonstrated opioid misuse versus 17.4% with DSM-5-defined use disorder.

Conclusions: The POMI lacks sufficient psychometric validity for use in oncology populations. Future tools should be specifically designed to address the clinical complexity and unique context of chronic cancer-related pain and opioid use.

鉴别癌症疼痛中的阿片类药物滥用:多中心研究中处方阿片类药物滥用指数的验证
目的:在癌症相关慢性疼痛患者中,镇痛阿片类药物(AO)滥用的患病率仍然知之甚少,并且没有针对这一人群的筛查工具得到验证。处方阿片类药物滥用指数(POMI)是一份八项自我管理的问卷,用于慢性非癌性疼痛。本研究旨在评估POMI在慢性癌症相关疼痛患者群体中的心理测量特性。方法:本前瞻性观察性心理测量学研究在克莱蒙费朗大学医院的两家肿瘤科日间医院进行。符合条件的患者为活动性癌症,慢性疼痛持续≥3个月,每日接受阿片类药物治疗。POMI问卷分别于入组时(TEST)和2周后(RETEST)完成。以DSM-5阿片类药物使用障碍标准为参考标准,按照标准指南评估心理测量特性,包括内部一致性、测试重测信度和外部效度。结果:共纳入138例患者(男性58%),平均年龄64±10岁。POMI的内部一致性较低(Kuder-Richardson系数:0.22)。在68例患者中评估的重测信度显示中等程度的一致性(Lin’s一致性:0.43[0.24-0.63])。POMI评分与DSM-5标准之间的相关性不大(Spearman ρ = 0.25)。根据POMI, 11.6%的患者表现出阿片类药物滥用,而17.4%的患者表现出dsm -5定义的使用障碍。结论:POMI在肿瘤人群中缺乏足够的心理测量效度。未来的工具应该专门设计来解决慢性癌症相关疼痛和阿片类药物使用的临床复杂性和独特背景。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Supportive Care in Cancer
Supportive Care in Cancer 医学-康复医学
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
9.70%
发文量
751
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Supportive Care in Cancer provides members of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) and all other interested individuals, groups and institutions with the most recent scientific and social information on all aspects of supportive care in cancer patients. It covers primarily medical, technical and surgical topics concerning supportive therapy and care which may supplement or substitute basic cancer treatment at all stages of the disease. Nursing, rehabilitative, psychosocial and spiritual issues of support are also included.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信