应如何规范阿片类药物的使用以促进更好的临床实践?

Q2 Social Sciences
Ellen L Edens, Gabriela Garcia Vassallo, Robert Heimer
{"title":"应如何规范阿片类药物的使用以促进更好的临床实践?","authors":"Ellen L Edens, Gabriela Garcia Vassallo, Robert Heimer","doi":"10.1001/amajethics.2024.551","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article describes historical and political reasons for-and devastating consequences of-US opioid prescribing policy since the 1990s, which has restricted opioid prescribing for pain less than for treating opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment. This article considers merits and drawbacks of a new diagnostic category and proposes a regulatory and clinical framework for prescribing long-term opioid therapy for pain and for prescribing opioids to treat OUD.</p>","PeriodicalId":38034,"journal":{"name":"AMA journal of ethics","volume":"26 7","pages":"E551-561"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How Should the Use of Opioids Be Regulated to Motivate Better Clinical Practice?\",\"authors\":\"Ellen L Edens, Gabriela Garcia Vassallo, Robert Heimer\",\"doi\":\"10.1001/amajethics.2024.551\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This article describes historical and political reasons for-and devastating consequences of-US opioid prescribing policy since the 1990s, which has restricted opioid prescribing for pain less than for treating opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment. This article considers merits and drawbacks of a new diagnostic category and proposes a regulatory and clinical framework for prescribing long-term opioid therapy for pain and for prescribing opioids to treat OUD.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":38034,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"AMA journal of ethics\",\"volume\":\"26 7\",\"pages\":\"E551-561\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"AMA journal of ethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1001/amajethics.2024.551\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AMA journal of ethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1001/amajethics.2024.551","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

自 20 世纪 90 年代以来,美国的阿片类药物处方政策对阿片类药物治疗疼痛的处方限制少于对阿片类药物使用障碍(OUD)治疗的处方限制,本文介绍了这一政策的历史和政治原因以及造成的破坏性后果。本文探讨了新诊断类别的优缺点,并提出了长期阿片类药物治疗疼痛处方和阿片类药物治疗 OUD 处方的监管和临床框架。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
How Should the Use of Opioids Be Regulated to Motivate Better Clinical Practice?

This article describes historical and political reasons for-and devastating consequences of-US opioid prescribing policy since the 1990s, which has restricted opioid prescribing for pain less than for treating opioid use disorder (OUD) treatment. This article considers merits and drawbacks of a new diagnostic category and proposes a regulatory and clinical framework for prescribing long-term opioid therapy for pain and for prescribing opioids to treat OUD.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
AMA journal of ethics
AMA journal of ethics Social Sciences-Health (social science)
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
146
期刊介绍: The AMA Journal of Ethics exists to help medical students, physicians and all health care professionals navigate ethical decisions in service to patients and society. The journal publishes cases and expert commentary, medical education articles, policy discussions, peer-reviewed articles for journal-based and audio CME, visuals, and more. Since its inception as an editorially-independent journal, we promote ethics inquiry as a public good.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信