Systematic review of real-world data associated with opioid scheduling and nonmedical use.

Q3 Medicine
Suzanne K Vosburg, Taryn Dailey-Govoni, Jody L Green
{"title":"Systematic review of real-world data associated with opioid scheduling and nonmedical use.","authors":"Suzanne K Vosburg, Taryn Dailey-Govoni, Jody L Green","doi":"10.5055/jom.0967","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>In the context of increased use of buprenorphine for pain management, comparison of real-world data (RWD) on prescription opioid nonmedical use (NMU) based on their controlled substance schedule may assist providers in providing effective pain management therapy while mitigating the risk of opioid NMU.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A systematic literature review of articles reporting RWD on prescription opioid NMU involving Schedule II (CII), Schedule III (CIII), and Schedule IV (CIV) opioid medications was conducted using PubMed®.</p><p><strong>Patients/participants: </strong>Human RWD collected in the United States from January 2010 to December 2023.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measure(s): </strong>Articles reporting RWD of prescription opioid NMU. Exclusions included buprenorphine/methadone medications for opioid use disorder, chronic use, or overdose without clearly established NMU (could not rule out legitimate medical use).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 2,585 articles screened for inclusion, 102 articles were assessed with a validated data extraction form, and 16 articles were reviewed that compared NMU and/or secondary NMU-related outcomes. Of these, only five articles contained RWD on NMU; all showed more NMU associated with CII than CIII or CIV opioids. Two articles evaluated buprenorphine (CIII) for analgesia and found lower rates of CIII NMU than comparator CII opioids.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Results of this systematic review support the differentiation in scheduling between CII and CIII/CIV opioid medications with RWD. This study also reveals a research gap in comparing CIII opioid medications for analgesia to CII and CIV opioids, an area of current and future interest, considering the growing use of buprenorphine for pain management, along with initiatives to curb opioid NMU.</p>","PeriodicalId":16601,"journal":{"name":"Journal of opioid management","volume":"22 1","pages":"77-89"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of opioid management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5055/jom.0967","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: In the context of increased use of buprenorphine for pain management, comparison of real-world data (RWD) on prescription opioid nonmedical use (NMU) based on their controlled substance schedule may assist providers in providing effective pain management therapy while mitigating the risk of opioid NMU.

Design: A systematic literature review of articles reporting RWD on prescription opioid NMU involving Schedule II (CII), Schedule III (CIII), and Schedule IV (CIV) opioid medications was conducted using PubMed®.

Patients/participants: Human RWD collected in the United States from January 2010 to December 2023.

Main outcome measure(s): Articles reporting RWD of prescription opioid NMU. Exclusions included buprenorphine/methadone medications for opioid use disorder, chronic use, or overdose without clearly established NMU (could not rule out legitimate medical use).

Results: There were 2,585 articles screened for inclusion, 102 articles were assessed with a validated data extraction form, and 16 articles were reviewed that compared NMU and/or secondary NMU-related outcomes. Of these, only five articles contained RWD on NMU; all showed more NMU associated with CII than CIII or CIV opioids. Two articles evaluated buprenorphine (CIII) for analgesia and found lower rates of CIII NMU than comparator CII opioids.

Conclusions: Results of this systematic review support the differentiation in scheduling between CII and CIII/CIV opioid medications with RWD. This study also reveals a research gap in comparing CIII opioid medications for analgesia to CII and CIV opioids, an area of current and future interest, considering the growing use of buprenorphine for pain management, along with initiatives to curb opioid NMU.

系统回顾与阿片类药物调度和非医疗使用相关的真实数据。
目的:在丁丙诺啡用于疼痛管理的背景下,基于受控物质时间表的处方阿片类药物非医疗使用(NMU)的真实世界数据(RWD)的比较可能有助于提供者提供有效的疼痛管理治疗,同时降低阿片类药物NMU的风险。设计:使用PubMed®对涉及附表II (CII)、附表III (CIII)和附表IV (CIV)阿片类药物的处方阿片类药物NMU RWD的文章进行系统的文献综述。患者/参与者:2010年1月至2023年12月在美国收集的人类RWD。主要结局指标:报道处方阿片类药物NMU的RWD的文章。排除包括丁丙诺啡/美沙酮类药物用于阿片类药物使用障碍、慢性使用或没有明确确定NMU的过量使用(不能排除合法的医疗使用)。结果:共有2585篇文章被筛选纳入,102篇文章通过有效的数据提取表进行评估,16篇文章被审查,比较了NMU和/或继发性NMU相关的结果。其中,只有5篇文章包含NMU的RWD;与CIII或CIV阿片类药物相比,所有阿片类药物均显示更多与CII相关的NMU。两篇文章评估了丁丙诺啡(CIII)的镇痛作用,发现CIII的NMU发生率低于比较物CII阿片类药物。结论:本系统综述的结果支持CII和CIII/CIV阿片类药物与RWD之间的计划差异。本研究还揭示了CIII类阿片类药物镇痛与CII和CIV类阿片类药物的比较研究差距,考虑到丁丙诺啡用于疼痛管理的使用越来越多,以及遏制阿片类药物NMU的举措,这是当前和未来感兴趣的领域。
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
Journal of opioid management
Journal of opioid management Medicine-Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
54
期刊介绍: The Journal of Opioid Management deals with all aspects of opioids. From basic science, pre-clinical, clinical, abuse, compliance and addiction medicine, the journal provides and unbiased forum for researchers and clinicians to explore and manage the complexities of opioid prescription.
×
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
小红书