title
stringclasses 5
values | id
int64 0
1.1k
| question
stringlengths 11
325
| answer_text
stringlengths 2
683
| answer_start
int64 0
1.9k
| context
stringlengths 156
2.15k
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Recommendations
| 1,034 |
What should not be used for treatment of acute pain?
|
Long-acting opioids
| 0 |
Long-acting opioids, as further discussed below, should not be used for treatment of acute pain, on an as needed basis, or during initiation of LOT (see Short-acting versus Long-acting Opioids). In general, however, no single opioid or opioid formulation is preferred over the others. However, individuals may have a better response, degree of safety, or tolerability depending on their individual characteristics and preferences. Additional information for use when deciding on appropriate pharmacological treatment of pain for a specific patient can be found in Appendix D.
|
Recommendations
| 1,035 |
Which opioid/opioid formulation is preferred over the others?
|
no single
| 217 |
Long-acting opioids, as further discussed below, should not be used for treatment of acute pain, on an as needed basis, or during initiation of LOT (see Short-acting versus Long-acting Opioids). In general, however, no single opioid or opioid formulation is preferred over the others. However, individuals may have a better response, degree of safety, or tolerability depending on their individual characteristics and preferences. Additional information for use when deciding on appropriate pharmacological treatment of pain for a specific patient can be found in Appendix D.
|
Recommendations
| 1,036 |
Which opioid/opioid formulation did not have enough evidence to be recommended for or against?
|
any specific opioid or opioid formulation, specifically the following: Short-acting versus long-acting opioids (for LOT for chronic pain), Route of administration/delivery among alternatives such as transdermal, buccal, sublingual, or pumps, Abuse deterrent formulations of opioids compared to non-abuse deterrent formulations, Tramadol and other dual-mechanism opioids. Buprenorphine for pain (compared to other opioids), Methadone (with QT monitoring).
| 60 |
There was insufficient evidence to recommend for or against any specific opioid or opioid formulation, specifically the following: Short-acting versus long-acting opioids (for LOT for chronic pain), Route of administration/delivery among alternatives such as transdermal, buccal, sublingual, or pumps, Abuse deterrent formulations of opioids compared to non-abuse deterrent formulations, Tramadol and other dual-mechanism opioids. Buprenorphine for pain (compared to other opioids), Methadone (with QT monitoring).
|
Recommendations
| 1,037 |
Which long-acting agents can be used for acute pain?
|
oxycodone/acetaminophen extended release [ER] tablets
| 107 |
Short-acting versus Long-acting Opioids: Avoid use of long-acting agents for acute pain (with exception of oxycodone/acetaminophen extended release [ER] tablets), on an as-needed basis, or for initiation of OT.[10,137-139] There is very low quality evidence to recommend for or against short-acting versus long-acting opioids for maintenance of OT. There were two RCTs included in the evidence review that looked at safety and efficacy. One RCT comparing long-acting to short-acting dihydrocodeine found no statistically or clinically significant differences in stability of pain intensity between the two groups, as well as no difference in adverse events. Although study results may be inconclusive due to poor study design, the authors state that they do not support the use of long-acting agents for chronic non-malignant pain.[140]
|
Recommendations
| 1,038 |
What was the efficacy of long-acting opioids used once-daily compared to twice-daily use?
|
non-inferior
| 9 |
A second non-inferiority RCT compared once-daily hydromorphone ER to twice-daily oxycodone controlled-release in patients with moderate-to-severe cancer pain. The primary efficacy endpoint was patient assessment of “Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) worst pain in the past 24 hr.” Results demonstrated similar improvements in BPI and that the once-daily hydromorphone formulation was non-inferior to the twice-daily oxycodone formulation. Treatment-emergent adverse events were comparable between the groups as well.[141] The efficacy of long-acting opioids used once-daily is non-inferior to twice-daily use. There was a lack of statistical analysis of the outcomes and a lack of statistical power in both studies, and a small sample size in one study.
|
Recommendations
| 1,039 |
Who has a significantly increased risk of all-cause mortality compared to patients with CNCP who are taking an analgesic anticonvulsants or a low-dose antidepressant?
|
patients with CNCP on long-acting OT
| 358 |
There is concern for additional overdose risk associated with long-acting versus short-acting opioids. A study (not included in the evidence review due to its design) suggests increased risk for non-fatal overdose in VA patients with initiation of a long-acting opioid compared with immediate-release opioids.[137] Also, recent research demonstrates that patients with CNCP on long-acting OT have a significantly increased risk of all-cause mortality compared to patients with CNCP who are taking an analgesic anticonvulsants or a low-dose antidepressant.[10]
|
Recommendations
| 1,040 |
What should be approached with extreme caution and warrants specialty consultation?
|
The concomitant use of oral and transdermal opioids or oral and intrathecal pumps
| 369 |
Route of Administration/Delivery: The systematic evidence review for this CPG did not find any studies that compared alternative delivery systems (e.g., fentanyl transdermal, fentanyl buccal) to other delivery systems (e.g., oral, intravenous) (information on transdermal and sublingual buprenorphine is included in the following section on Buprenorphine for Pain). The concomitant use of oral and transdermal opioids or oral and intrathecal pumps should be approached with extreme caution and warrants specialty consultation. Discussions of intrathecal pumps are beyond the scope of this guideline.
|
Recommendations
| 1,041 |
Which opioid delivery for opioids has significant potential for harm from OT?
|
either transdermal or buccal
| 34 |
Although some patients may prefer either transdermal or buccal opioid delivery for opioids, there is significant potential for harm from OT with these delivery mechanisms, with no evidence of benefit over traditional opioid delivery systems in patients with chronic pain. Clinicians need to be especially aware of the risks associated with a fentanyl transdermal delivery system (or patch) (Appendix D) including its: Unique pharmacokinetic profile, Continuous delivery, even after the patch is removed due to depot effect, Increased rate of delivery, Unpredictable variation in rate of delivery - Due to alterations in temperature due to external heat, skin integrity, and amount of adipose tissue, Among patients with fever, skin damage, or cachexia.
|
Recommendations
| 1,042 |
Which delivery mechanism has no evidence of benefit ove traditional opioid delivery systems in patients with chronic pain?
|
either transdermal or buccal
| 34 |
Although some patients may prefer either transdermal or buccal opioid delivery for opioids, there is significant potential for harm from OT with these delivery mechanisms, with no evidence of benefit over traditional opioid delivery systems in patients with chronic pain. Clinicians need to be especially aware of the risks associated with a fentanyl transdermal delivery system (or patch) (Appendix D) including its: Unique pharmacokinetic profile, Continuous delivery, even after the patch is removed due to depot effect, Increased rate of delivery, Unpredictable variation in rate of delivery - Due to alterations in temperature due to external heat, skin integrity, and amount of adipose tissue, Among patients with fever, skin damage, or cachexia.
|
Recommendations
| 1,043 |
What are the risks associated with a fentanyl transdermal delivery system (or patch)?
|
Unique pharmacokinetic profile, Continuous delivery, even after the patch is removed due to depot effect, Increased rate of delivery, Unpredictable variation in rate of delivery - Due to alterations in temperature due to external heat, skin integrity, and amount of adipose tissue, Among patients with fever, skin damage, or cachexia
| 421 |
Although some patients may prefer either transdermal or buccal opioid delivery for opioids, there is significant potential for harm from OT with these delivery mechanisms, with no evidence of benefit over traditional opioid delivery systems in patients with chronic pain. Clinicians need to be especially aware of the risks associated with a fentanyl transdermal delivery system (or patch) (Appendix D) including its: Unique pharmacokinetic profile, Continuous delivery, even after the patch is removed due to depot effect, Increased rate of delivery, Unpredictable variation in rate of delivery - Due to alterations in temperature due to external heat, skin integrity, and amount of adipose tissue, Among patients with fever, skin damage, or cachexia.
|
Recommendations
| 1,045 |
What is the aim of most abuse deterrent formulations?
|
to present a physical barrier to prevent chewing, crushing, cutting, grating, or grinding of the dosage form, or present a chemical barrier, such as a gelling agent, that will resist extraction of the opioid with use of a common solvent
| 89 |
Abuse Deterrent Formulations of Opioids: The aim of most abuse deterrent formulations is to present a physical barrier to prevent chewing, crushing, cutting, grating, or grinding of the dosage form, or present a chemical barrier, such as a gelling agent, that will resist extraction of the opioid with use of a common solvent. Alternatively, an opioid antagonist (naloxone or naltrexone) can be added to interfere with, reduce, or defeat the euphoria associated with abuse of an agent intended for oral use when taken nasally or parenterally.[142] While these properties deter abuse they do not fully prevent abuse; no opioid formulation prevents consumption of a large number of intact capsules or tablets which continues to be the most common method of abuse.
|
Recommendations
| 1,046 |
What can be added to interfere with, reduce, or defeat the euphoria associated with abuse of an agent intended for oral use when taken nasally or parenterally?
|
an opioid antagonist (naloxone or naltrexone)
| 344 |
Abuse Deterrent Formulations of Opioids: The aim of most abuse deterrent formulations is to present a physical barrier to prevent chewing, crushing, cutting, grating, or grinding of the dosage form, or present a chemical barrier, such as a gelling agent, that will resist extraction of the opioid with use of a common solvent. Alternatively, an opioid antagonist (naloxone or naltrexone) can be added to interfere with, reduce, or defeat the euphoria associated with abuse of an agent intended for oral use when taken nasally or parenterally.[142] While these properties deter abuse they do not fully prevent abuse; no opioid formulation prevents consumption of a large number of intact capsules or tablets which continues to be the most common method of abuse.
|
Recommendations
| 1,047 |
What is the most common method of abuse?
|
consumption of a large number of intact capsules or tablets
| 652 |
Abuse Deterrent Formulations of Opioids: The aim of most abuse deterrent formulations is to present a physical barrier to prevent chewing, crushing, cutting, grating, or grinding of the dosage form, or present a chemical barrier, such as a gelling agent, that will resist extraction of the opioid with use of a common solvent. Alternatively, an opioid antagonist (naloxone or naltrexone) can be added to interfere with, reduce, or defeat the euphoria associated with abuse of an agent intended for oral use when taken nasally or parenterally.[142] While these properties deter abuse they do not fully prevent abuse; no opioid formulation prevents consumption of a large number of intact capsules or tablets which continues to be the most common method of abuse.
|
Recommendations
| 1,048 |
What is the stance regarding the abuse deterrent formulations for LOT?
|
do not recommend for or against
| 3 |
We do not recommend for or against abuse deterrent formulations for LOT. Our searches identified two RCTs in which the benefits of co-prescribing of naloxone with opioids were examined.[143,144] However, both RCTs were rated as low to very low quality with short-term follow-up. One open-label RCT enrolling 453 patients with chronic low back pain considered the safety and tolerability of an abuse deterrent formulation of oxycodone/naloxone relative to oxycodone or morphine at 12-week follow-up.[143] Another RCT considered the safety and efficacy of oxycodone/naloxone prolonged-release relative to oxycodone prolonged-release in 184 patients with moderate-to-severe chronic cancer pain at four-week follow-up.[144] An observational study (not included in the evidence review) suggested that the Introductory information of abuse deterrent opioid formulations did not help reduce abuse of opioids as a class and that patients may switch from one opioid to another based on the availability or the lack of availability of abuse deterrent formulations.[145]
|
Recommendations
| 1,049 |
What is needed to ascertain whether abuse deterrent formulations actually reduce OUD when used for chronic pain?
|
Future research
| 0 |
Future research is needed to ascertain whether abuse deterrent formulations actually reduce OUD when used for chronic pain, and whether said formulations differ across clinical outcomes such as pain, function, and adverse events.
|
Recommendations
| 1,050 |
What is needed to ascertain whether said formulations differ across clinical outcomes such as pain, function, and adverse events?
|
Future research
| 0 |
Future research is needed to ascertain whether abuse deterrent formulations actually reduce OUD when used for chronic pain, and whether said formulations differ across clinical outcomes such as pain, function, and adverse events.
|
Recommendations
| 1,051 |
What is included in the dual-mechanism opioids?
|
formulations of an opioid medication with a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) or a serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI)
| 55 |
Dual-Mechanism Opioids: Dual-mechanism opioids include formulations of an opioid medication with a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) or a serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI). Two common examples are tramadol and tapentadol. While both are dual-mechanism opioids, they differ in their affinity for the mu opioid receptor, resulting in partial versus full agonist effects, and as such are discussed separately.
|
Recommendations
| 1,052 |
What are the examples of dual-mechanism opioids?
|
tramadol and tapentadol
| 228 |
Dual-Mechanism Opioids: Dual-mechanism opioids include formulations of an opioid medication with a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) or a serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI). Two common examples are tramadol and tapentadol. While both are dual-mechanism opioids, they differ in their affinity for the mu opioid receptor, resulting in partial versus full agonist effects, and as such are discussed separately.
|
Recommendations
| 1,053 |
What are the differences between tramadol and tapentadol?
|
While both are dual-mechanism opioids, they differ in their affinity for the mu opioid receptor, resulting in partial versus full agonist effects
| 253 |
Dual-Mechanism Opioids: Dual-mechanism opioids include formulations of an opioid medication with a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) or a serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI). Two common examples are tramadol and tapentadol. While both are dual-mechanism opioids, they differ in their affinity for the mu opioid receptor, resulting in partial versus full agonist effects, and as such are discussed separately.
|
Recommendations
| 1,054 |
Is there any evidence of the comparative efficacy of tramadol versus another opioid or a non-opioid comparison such as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or acetaminophen?
|
no long-term evidence
| 205 |
Tramadol: There is low quality evidence that tramadol may be more effective than placebo for pain relief. In one short-term study, compared to placebo, tramadol was more effective for pain.[146] There is no long-term evidence of the comparative efficacy of tramadol versus another opioid or a non-opioid comparison such as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or acetaminophen. Due to tramadol’s partial mu agonist activity and demonstrated safety profile when used in conjunction with acetaminophen in elderly patients, it may be a preferred agent in that patient group.[147,148]
|
Recommendations
| 1,055 |
What is recommended for mild-to-moderate acute pain?
|
alternatives to opioids
| 13 |
We recommend alternatives to opioids for mild-to-moderate acute pain. (Strong for). We suggest use of multimodal pain care including non-opioid medications as indicated when opioids are used for acute pain. (Weak for). If take-home opioids are prescribed, we recommend that immediate-release opioids are used at the lowest effective dose with opioid therapy reassessment no later than 3-5 days to determine if adjustments or continuing opioid therapy is indicated. (Strong for). Note: Patient education about opioid risks and alternatives to opioid therapy should be offered.
|
Recommendations
| 1,056 |
What is sugested when opioids are used for acute pain?
|
use of multimodal pain care including non-opioid medications as indicated
| 95 |
We recommend alternatives to opioids for mild-to-moderate acute pain. (Strong for). We suggest use of multimodal pain care including non-opioid medications as indicated when opioids are used for acute pain. (Weak for). If take-home opioids are prescribed, we recommend that immediate-release opioids are used at the lowest effective dose with opioid therapy reassessment no later than 3-5 days to determine if adjustments or continuing opioid therapy is indicated. (Strong for). Note: Patient education about opioid risks and alternatives to opioid therapy should be offered.
|
Recommendations
| 1,057 |
What is recommended if take-home opioids are prescribed?
|
immediate-release opioids are used at the lowest effective dose with opioid therapy reassessment no later than 3-5 days to determine if adjustments or continuing opioid therapy is indicated
| 274 |
We recommend alternatives to opioids for mild-to-moderate acute pain. (Strong for). We suggest use of multimodal pain care including non-opioid medications as indicated when opioids are used for acute pain. (Weak for). If take-home opioids are prescribed, we recommend that immediate-release opioids are used at the lowest effective dose with opioid therapy reassessment no later than 3-5 days to determine if adjustments or continuing opioid therapy is indicated. (Strong for). Note: Patient education about opioid risks and alternatives to opioid therapy should be offered.
|
Recommendations
| 1,058 |
What should be offered to patients?
|
Patient education about opioid risks and alternatives to opioid therapy
| 486 |
We recommend alternatives to opioids for mild-to-moderate acute pain. (Strong for). We suggest use of multimodal pain care including non-opioid medications as indicated when opioids are used for acute pain. (Weak for). If take-home opioids are prescribed, we recommend that immediate-release opioids are used at the lowest effective dose with opioid therapy reassessment no later than 3-5 days to determine if adjustments or continuing opioid therapy is indicated. (Strong for). Note: Patient education about opioid risks and alternatives to opioid therapy should be offered.
|
Recommendations
| 1,059 |
What can can be a gateway to LOT?
|
acute OT
| 116 |
As this guideline is related to LOT, the use of opioids for acute pain is not reviewed in detail. However, because acute OT can be a gateway to LOT, it is part of this CPG. A review of the literature indicates that LOT can result from acute opioid use initially intended for short-term therapy. Further, there is a risk of opioid-related overdose even during acute OT. While it is understood that acute OT for severe pain due to injuries or surgery is the most effective option for many patients, the risks associated with acute therapy must be addressed when opioids are prescribed or considered.
|
Recommendations
| 1,060 |
Who are at an increased risks of acute OT extending into LOT?
|
patients with mood disorders, those who refill the initial prescription, higher prescribed dose (greater than 120 mg MEDD), and initiation using long acting opioids
| 58 |
The risks of acute OT extending into LOT are increased in patients with mood disorders, those who refill the initial prescription, higher prescribed dose (greater than 120 mg MEDD), and initiation using long acting opioids.[183-185] The risk of acute post-operative OT progressing into LOT is increased with a history of depression, SUD, catastrophizing, higher preoperative total body pain, history of back pain, and preoperative use of sedative-hypnotics or antidepressants.[186,187]
|
Recommendations
| 1,061 |
What does increase the risk of acute post-operative OT progressing into LOT?
|
a history of depression, SUD, catastrophizing, higher preoperative total body pain, history of back pain, and preoperative use of sedative-hypnotics or antidepressants
| 309 |
The risks of acute OT extending into LOT are increased in patients with mood disorders, those who refill the initial prescription, higher prescribed dose (greater than 120 mg MEDD), and initiation using long acting opioids.[183-185] The risk of acute post-operative OT progressing into LOT is increased with a history of depression, SUD, catastrophizing, higher preoperative total body pain, history of back pain, and preoperative use of sedative-hypnotics or antidepressants.[186,187]
|
Recommendations
| 1,062 |
What does risk of overdose include?
|
the use of opioids for acute pain
| 43 |
In addition, the risk of overdose includes the use of opioids for acute pain. Factors that increase overdose risk when opioids are used for acute pain include high prescribed dose, history of SUD, and history of mental health concerns. While the risk of overdose increases at doses above 20 mg MEDD or greater, this risk increases even further as doses increase to over 50 or 100 mg MEDD.[58,59,188]
|
Recommendations
| 1,063 |
Which factors increase overdose risk when opioids are used for acute pain?
|
high prescribed dose, history of SUD, and history of mental health concerns
| 160 |
In addition, the risk of overdose includes the use of opioids for acute pain. Factors that increase overdose risk when opioids are used for acute pain include high prescribed dose, history of SUD, and history of mental health concerns. While the risk of overdose increases at doses above 20 mg MEDD or greater, this risk increases even further as doses increase to over 50 or 100 mg MEDD.[58,59,188]
|
Recommendations
| 1,064 |
Which opioid risk mitigation strategies should be incorporateed into opioid prescribing for acute pain?
|
patient education, use of non-opioid adjunctive therapy, and structured reassessment of opioid risks and benefits for all on acute OT. Also, consider checking the PDMP and performing a UDT.
| 260 |
There are situations in which opioids may be necessary therapy for acute pain, even when substantial risk factors exist. It is important to incorporate opioid risk mitigation strategies into opioid prescribing for acute pain. These strategies should include patient education, use of non-opioid adjunctive therapy, and structured reassessment of opioid risks and benefits for all on acute OT. Also, consider checking the PDMP and performing a UDT.
|
Recommendations
| 1,066 |
Depending on which factors monitoring standards with administration of OT for acute pain vary?
|
the setting, specifics of the painful insult, patient medical factors, and selected medication potency/dose/route of administration/adjunct selection
| 111 |
Monitoring standards with administration of OT for acute pain vary depending on a number of factors including the setting, specifics of the painful insult, patient medical factors, and selected medication potency/dose/route of administration/adjunct selection.
|
Features and overview
| 1,067 |
For whom is this guideline intended?
|
VA and DoD healthcare practitioners including physicians, nurse practitioners, physician assistants, physical and occupational therapists, psychologists, social workers, nurses, clinical pharmacists, chaplains, addiction counselors, and others involved in the care of Service Members and their beneficiaries, retirees and their beneficiaries, or Veterans on or being considered for LOT
| 209 |
This OT CPG is in line with the efforts described above to improve our understanding and treatment of pain, as well as to mitigate the inappropriate prescribing and ill effects of opioids. It is intended for VA and DoD healthcare practitioners including physicians, nurse practitioners, physician assistants, physical and occupational therapists, psychologists, social workers, nurses, clinical pharmacists, chaplains, addiction counselors, and others involved in the care of Service Members and their beneficiaries, retirees and their beneficiaries, or Veterans on or being considered for LOT. In conjunction with other efforts already under way, this CPG is aimed at improving safe and appropriate prescribing and use of opioids to treat chronic pain.
|
Features and overview
| 1,068 |
What are the limitation of this CPG?
|
As with other CPGs, there are limitations, including significant evidence gaps. Further, there is a need to develop effective strategies for guideline implementation and evaluation of the effect of guideline adherence on clinical outcomes.
| 0 |
As with other CPGs, there are limitations, including significant evidence gaps. Further, there is a need to develop effective strategies for guideline implementation and evaluation of the effect of guideline adherence on clinical outcomes. Thus, as stated in the qualifying statements at the beginning of the CPG, this CPG is not intended to serve as a standard of care. Standards of care are determined on the basis of all clinical data available for an individual patient and are subject to change as scientific knowledge and technology advance and patterns evolve. This CPG is based on evidence available by December 2016 and is intended to provide a general guide to best practices. The guideline can assist healthcare providers, but the use of a CPG must always be considered as a recommendation, within the context of a provider’s clinical judgment and patient values and preferences, for the care of an individual patient.
|
Features and overview
| 1,069 |
How are the standards of care determined?
|
on the basis of all clinical data available for an individual patient and are subject to change as scientific knowledge and technology advance and patterns evolve
| 407 |
As with other CPGs, there are limitations, including significant evidence gaps. Further, there is a need to develop effective strategies for guideline implementation and evaluation of the effect of guideline adherence on clinical outcomes. Thus, as stated in the qualifying statements at the beginning of the CPG, this CPG is not intended to serve as a standard of care. Standards of care are determined on the basis of all clinical data available for an individual patient and are subject to change as scientific knowledge and technology advance and patterns evolve. This CPG is based on evidence available by December 2016 and is intended to provide a general guide to best practices. The guideline can assist healthcare providers, but the use of a CPG must always be considered as a recommendation, within the context of a provider’s clinical judgment and patient values and preferences, for the care of an individual patient.
|
Features and overview
| 1,070 |
What is not the intention of this guideline?
|
to serve as a standard of care
| 342 |
As with other CPGs, there are limitations, including significant evidence gaps. Further, there is a need to develop effective strategies for guideline implementation and evaluation of the effect of guideline adherence on clinical outcomes. Thus, as stated in the qualifying statements at the beginning of the CPG, this CPG is not intended to serve as a standard of care. Standards of care are determined on the basis of all clinical data available for an individual patient and are subject to change as scientific knowledge and technology advance and patterns evolve. This CPG is based on evidence available by December 2016 and is intended to provide a general guide to best practices. The guideline can assist healthcare providers, but the use of a CPG must always be considered as a recommendation, within the context of a provider’s clinical judgment and patient values and preferences, for the care of an individual patient.
|
Features and overview
| 1,071 |
This CPG is based on what?
|
evidence available by December 2016
| 594 |
As with other CPGs, there are limitations, including significant evidence gaps. Further, there is a need to develop effective strategies for guideline implementation and evaluation of the effect of guideline adherence on clinical outcomes. Thus, as stated in the qualifying statements at the beginning of the CPG, this CPG is not intended to serve as a standard of care. Standards of care are determined on the basis of all clinical data available for an individual patient and are subject to change as scientific knowledge and technology advance and patterns evolve. This CPG is based on evidence available by December 2016 and is intended to provide a general guide to best practices. The guideline can assist healthcare providers, but the use of a CPG must always be considered as a recommendation, within the context of a provider’s clinical judgment and patient values and preferences, for the care of an individual patient.
|
Features and overview
| 1,072 |
How to use a CPG?
|
the use of a CPG must always be considered as a recommendation, within the context of a provider’s clinical judgment and patient values and preferences, for the care of an individual patient
| 745 |
As with other CPGs, there are limitations, including significant evidence gaps. Further, there is a need to develop effective strategies for guideline implementation and evaluation of the effect of guideline adherence on clinical outcomes. Thus, as stated in the qualifying statements at the beginning of the CPG, this CPG is not intended to serve as a standard of care. Standards of care are determined on the basis of all clinical data available for an individual patient and are subject to change as scientific knowledge and technology advance and patterns evolve. This CPG is based on evidence available by December 2016 and is intended to provide a general guide to best practices. The guideline can assist healthcare providers, but the use of a CPG must always be considered as a recommendation, within the context of a provider’s clinical judgment and patient values and preferences, for the care of an individual patient.
|
Features and overview
| 1,073 |
What is this OT CPG designed to do?
|
assist healthcare providers in managing or co-managing patients on or being considered for LOT
| 27 |
This OT CPG is designed to assist healthcare providers in managing or co-managing patients on or being considered for LOT. Specifically, this CPG is intended for adults, including Veterans as well as deployed and non-deployed Active Duty Service Members, their beneficiaries, and retirees and their beneficiaries, with chronic pain who are receiving care from the VA or DoD healthcare delivery systems. This CPG is not intended for and does not provide recommendations for the management of pain with LOT in children or adolescents, in patients with acute pain, or in patients receiving end-of-life care. As is so for any pharmacotherapy, any decision about prescribing opioids, or alternative medications for pain, for pregnant women should be made with due caution and cognizance of applicable U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) labeling. Any patient in the VA or DoD healthcare system should be offered access to the interventions that are recommended in this guideline after taking into consideration the patient’s specific circumstances.
|
Features and overview
| 1,074 |
For whom is his CPG is intended?
|
adults, including Veterans as well as deployed and non-deployed Active Duty Service Members, their beneficiaries, and retirees and their beneficiaries, with chronic pain who are receiving care from the VA or DoD healthcare delivery systems
| 163 |
This OT CPG is designed to assist healthcare providers in managing or co-managing patients on or being considered for LOT. Specifically, this CPG is intended for adults, including Veterans as well as deployed and non-deployed Active Duty Service Members, their beneficiaries, and retirees and their beneficiaries, with chronic pain who are receiving care from the VA or DoD healthcare delivery systems. This CPG is not intended for and does not provide recommendations for the management of pain with LOT in children or adolescents, in patients with acute pain, or in patients receiving end-of-life care. As is so for any pharmacotherapy, any decision about prescribing opioids, or alternative medications for pain, for pregnant women should be made with due caution and cognizance of applicable U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) labeling. Any patient in the VA or DoD healthcare system should be offered access to the interventions that are recommended in this guideline after taking into consideration the patient’s specific circumstances.
|
Features and overview
| 1,075 |
What does this CPG not do?
|
does not provide recommendations for the management of pain with LOT in children or adolescents, in patients with acute pain, or in patients receiving end-of-life care
| 440 |
This OT CPG is designed to assist healthcare providers in managing or co-managing patients on or being considered for LOT. Specifically, this CPG is intended for adults, including Veterans as well as deployed and non-deployed Active Duty Service Members, their beneficiaries, and retirees and their beneficiaries, with chronic pain who are receiving care from the VA or DoD healthcare delivery systems. This CPG is not intended for and does not provide recommendations for the management of pain with LOT in children or adolescents, in patients with acute pain, or in patients receiving end-of-life care. As is so for any pharmacotherapy, any decision about prescribing opioids, or alternative medications for pain, for pregnant women should be made with due caution and cognizance of applicable U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) labeling. Any patient in the VA or DoD healthcare system should be offered access to the interventions that are recommended in this guideline after taking into consideration the patient’s specific circumstances.
|
Features and overview
| 1,077 |
Why is an empathetic and non-judgmental approach highly recommended for communication with a patient?
|
in order to build trust and facilitate frank discussions relating to the social, economic, emotional, and cultural factors that influence patients’ perceptions, behaviors, and decision making
| 566 |
While these guidelines are broadly recommended, their implementation is intended to be patient centered. Thus, treatment and care should take into account a patient’s needs and preferences. Good communication between healthcare professionals and the patient about the patient’s pain experience, treatment goals, and challenges is essential and should be guided by evidence-based information tailored to the patient’s needs. An empathetic and non-judgmental (versus a confrontational or adversarial) approach to communication with a patient is highly recommended in order to build trust and facilitate frank discussions relating to the social, economic, emotional, and cultural factors that influence patients’ perceptions, behaviors, and decision making. The information that patients are given about treatment and care should be culturally appropriate and also available to people with limited literacy skills. It should also be accessible to people with additional needs such as physical, sensory, or learning disabilities. Family involvement should be considered if appropriate.
|
Features and overview
| 1,078 |
Why only nine key questions (KQs) were prioritized from many possible KQs?
|
Because a comprehensive review of the evidence related to LOT was not feasible
| 351 |
The systematic review conducted for the update of this CPG encompassed interventional studies (primarily randomized controlled trials [RCTs]) published between March 2009 and December 2016 and targeted nine key questions (KQs) focusing on the means by which the delivery of healthcare could be optimized for patients on or being considered for LOT. Because a comprehensive review of the evidence related to LOT was not feasible, the nine selected KQs were prioritized from many possible KQs. Therefore, many of the 2010 OT CPG recommendations were considered for inclusion in the updated version of the guideline without an updated review of the evidence. The section on Recommendations delineates whether or not the current CPG recommendations were based on an updated evidence review. Appendix H delineates whether the 2010 OT CPG recommendations were considered for inclusion in the update based on an updated evidence review or based on the evidence included in the 2010 OT CPG. The section on Recommendation Categorization further describes the methodology used for the categorization.
|
Features and overview
| 1,079 |
What does the 2017 version of the VA/DoD OT CPG provide?
|
practice recommendations for the care of populations with chronic pain already on or being considered for LOT
| 92 |
The 2017 version of the VA/DoD OT CPG is the second update to the original CPG. It provides practice recommendations for the care of populations with chronic pain already on or being considered for LOT. Although there are many other approaches to the treatment of chronic pain, the scope of this CPG is to focus on the use of opioids for chronic pain rather than being comprehensive about all treatment options. A particular strength of this CPG is the multidisciplinary stakeholder involvement from its inception, ensuring representation from the broad spectrum of clinicians engaged in the treatment and management of patients with chronic pain on or being considered for LOT.
|
Features and overview
| 1,080 |
What is the scope of this CPG?
|
to focus on the use of opioids for chronic pain rather than being comprehensive about all treatment options
| 305 |
The 2017 version of the VA/DoD OT CPG is the second update to the original CPG. It provides practice recommendations for the care of populations with chronic pain already on or being considered for LOT. Although there are many other approaches to the treatment of chronic pain, the scope of this CPG is to focus on the use of opioids for chronic pain rather than being comprehensive about all treatment options. A particular strength of this CPG is the multidisciplinary stakeholder involvement from its inception, ensuring representation from the broad spectrum of clinicians engaged in the treatment and management of patients with chronic pain on or being considered for LOT.
|
Features and overview
| 1,081 |
What is the strength of this CPG?
|
the multidisciplinary stakeholder involvement from its inception, ensuring representation from the broad spectrum of clinicians engaged in the treatment and management of patients with chronic pain on or being considered for LOT
| 453 |
The 2017 version of the VA/DoD OT CPG is the second update to the original CPG. It provides practice recommendations for the care of populations with chronic pain already on or being considered for LOT. Although there are many other approaches to the treatment of chronic pain, the scope of this CPG is to focus on the use of opioids for chronic pain rather than being comprehensive about all treatment options. A particular strength of this CPG is the multidisciplinary stakeholder involvement from its inception, ensuring representation from the broad spectrum of clinicians engaged in the treatment and management of patients with chronic pain on or being considered for LOT.
|
Features and overview
| 1,082 |
Which factors were considered for the framework for recommendations in this CPG?
|
balancing desired outcomes with potential harms of treatment, equity of resource availability, the potential for variation in patient values and preferences, and other considerations
| 113 |
The framework for recommendations in this CPG considered factors beyond the strength of the evidence, including balancing desired outcomes with potential harms of treatment, equity of resource availability, the potential for variation in patient values and preferences, and other considerations (see Methods for more information). Applicability of the evidence to VA/DoD populations was also taken into consideration. A structured algorithm (see Algorithm) accompanies the guideline to provide an overview of the recommendations in the context of the flow of patient care and clinician decision making and to assist with training providers. The algorithm may be used to help facilitate translation of guideline recommendations into effective practice.
|
Features and overview
| 1,083 |
What methodology was used in developing the 2017 CPG?
|
the VA/DoD Guideline for Guidelines,[1] an internal document of the VA and DoD EBPWG
| 193 |
The current document is an update to the 2010 VA/DoD Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Opioid Therapy for Chronic Pain. The methodology used in developing the 2017 CPG follows the VA/DoD Guideline for Guidelines,[1] an internal document of the VA and DoD EBPWG. The VA/DoD Guideline for Guidelines can be downloaded from http://www.healthquality.va.gov/policy/index.asp. This document provides information regarding the process of developing guidelines, including the identification and assembly of the Guideline Champions (“Champions”) and other subject matter experts from within the VA and DoD, known as the “Work Group,” and ultimately, the development and submission of an updated OT CPG. The VA Office of Quality, Safety and Value, in collaboration with the Office of Evidence Based Practice, U.S. Army Medical Command, the proponent for CPGs for the DoD, identified two clinical leaders, Jack Rosenberg, MD, FASAM from the VA and Christopher Spevak, MD, MPH, JD from the DoD, as Champions for the 2017 CPG.
|
Features and overview
| 1,084 |
What does the VA/DoD Guideline for Guidelines provide?
|
information regarding the process of developing guidelines, including the identification and assembly of the Guideline Champions (“Champions”) and other subject matter experts from within the VA and DoD, known as the “Work Group,” and ultimately, the development and submission of an updated OT CPG
| 414 |
The current document is an update to the 2010 VA/DoD Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Opioid Therapy for Chronic Pain. The methodology used in developing the 2017 CPG follows the VA/DoD Guideline for Guidelines,[1] an internal document of the VA and DoD EBPWG. The VA/DoD Guideline for Guidelines can be downloaded from http://www.healthquality.va.gov/policy/index.asp. This document provides information regarding the process of developing guidelines, including the identification and assembly of the Guideline Champions (“Champions”) and other subject matter experts from within the VA and DoD, known as the “Work Group,” and ultimately, the development and submission of an updated OT CPG. The VA Office of Quality, Safety and Value, in collaboration with the Office of Evidence Based Practice, U.S. Army Medical Command, the proponent for CPGs for the DoD, identified two clinical leaders, Jack Rosenberg, MD, FASAM from the VA and Christopher Spevak, MD, MPH, JD from the DoD, as Champions for the 2017 CPG.
|
Features and overview
| 1,085 |
What does VA/DoD CPGs encourage clinicians to do?
|
to use a patient-centered care approach that is tailored to the patient’s capabilities, needs, goals, prior treatment experience, and preferences
| 33 |
VA/DoD CPGs encourage clinicians to use a patient-centered care approach that is tailored to the patient’s capabilities, needs, goals, prior treatment experience, and preferences. Regardless of setting, all patients in the healthcare system should be offered access to evidence-based interventions appropriate to that patient. When properly executed, patient-centered care may decrease patient anxiety, increase trust in clinicians,[77] and improve treatment adherence.[78] Improved patient-clinician communication through patient-centered care can be used to convey openness to discuss any future concerns.
|
Features and overview
| 1,086 |
What should all patients in the healthcare system be offered?
|
access to evidence-based interventions appropriate to that patient
| 261 |
VA/DoD CPGs encourage clinicians to use a patient-centered care approach that is tailored to the patient’s capabilities, needs, goals, prior treatment experience, and preferences. Regardless of setting, all patients in the healthcare system should be offered access to evidence-based interventions appropriate to that patient. When properly executed, patient-centered care may decrease patient anxiety, increase trust in clinicians,[77] and improve treatment adherence.[78] Improved patient-clinician communication through patient-centered care can be used to convey openness to discuss any future concerns.
|
Features and overview
| 1,087 |
What is the purpose of patient-centered care?
|
decrease patient anxiety, increase trust in clinicians,[77] and improve treatment adherence
| 380 |
VA/DoD CPGs encourage clinicians to use a patient-centered care approach that is tailored to the patient’s capabilities, needs, goals, prior treatment experience, and preferences. Regardless of setting, all patients in the healthcare system should be offered access to evidence-based interventions appropriate to that patient. When properly executed, patient-centered care may decrease patient anxiety, increase trust in clinicians,[77] and improve treatment adherence.[78] Improved patient-clinician communication through patient-centered care can be used to convey openness to discuss any future concerns.
|
Features and overview
| 1,088 |
What can be used to convey openness to discuss any future concerns?
|
Improved patient-clinician communication through patient-centered care
| 478 |
VA/DoD CPGs encourage clinicians to use a patient-centered care approach that is tailored to the patient’s capabilities, needs, goals, prior treatment experience, and preferences. Regardless of setting, all patients in the healthcare system should be offered access to evidence-based interventions appropriate to that patient. When properly executed, patient-centered care may decrease patient anxiety, increase trust in clinicians,[77] and improve treatment adherence.[78] Improved patient-clinician communication through patient-centered care can be used to convey openness to discuss any future concerns.
|
Features and overview
| 1,089 |
What should the clinicians do as part of the patient-centered care approach?
|
review the patient’s history including previous treatment approaches, their results, and any other outcomes with the patient
| 65 |
As part of the patient-centered care approach, clinicians should review the patient’s history including previous treatment approaches, their results, and any other outcomes with the patient. They should ask the patient about his or her willingness to accept a referral to an addiction or other behavioral health specialist when appropriate. Lastly, they should involve the patient in prioritizing problems to be addressed and in setting specific goals regardless of the selected setting or level of care. The below approach may be used in setting SMART (Specific, Measurable, Action Oriented, Realistic, Timed) goals for the patient (Table 1).
|
Features and overview
| 1,090 |
What should the clinicians ask the patient?
|
about his or her willingness to accept a referral to an addiction or other behavioral health specialist when appropriate
| 219 |
As part of the patient-centered care approach, clinicians should review the patient’s history including previous treatment approaches, their results, and any other outcomes with the patient. They should ask the patient about his or her willingness to accept a referral to an addiction or other behavioral health specialist when appropriate. Lastly, they should involve the patient in prioritizing problems to be addressed and in setting specific goals regardless of the selected setting or level of care. The below approach may be used in setting SMART (Specific, Measurable, Action Oriented, Realistic, Timed) goals for the patient (Table 1).
|
Features and overview
| 1,091 |
What is the basis of the shared decision making process for chronic pain treatment planning?
|
the foundation of a patient-centered assessment of risks and benefits and a clinical synthesis performed by the provider
| 83 |
The shared decision making process for chronic pain treatment planning is based on the foundation of a patient-centered assessment of risks and benefits and a clinical synthesis performed by the provider (Figure 1). The patient-centered assessment incorporates a patient-centered interview, and exploration of patient values, goals, questions, concerns, and expectations. Next, the clinician performs a biopsychosocial assessment and determines clinically appropriate therapeutic options in which benefits are likely to outweigh risks. The process culminates in a shared decision making process to develop a patient-centered treatment plan by the patient selecting from the clinically appropriate treatment options generated in the first two steps.
|
Features and overview
| 1,092 |
What does the patient-centered assessment incorporate?
|
a patient-centered interview, and exploration of patient values, goals, questions, concerns, and expectations
| 263 |
The shared decision making process for chronic pain treatment planning is based on the foundation of a patient-centered assessment of risks and benefits and a clinical synthesis performed by the provider (Figure 1). The patient-centered assessment incorporates a patient-centered interview, and exploration of patient values, goals, questions, concerns, and expectations. Next, the clinician performs a biopsychosocial assessment and determines clinically appropriate therapeutic options in which benefits are likely to outweigh risks. The process culminates in a shared decision making process to develop a patient-centered treatment plan by the patient selecting from the clinically appropriate treatment options generated in the first two steps.
|
Features and overview
| 1,093 |
What can facilitate clinical risk assessment and adherence to risk mitigation?
|
There are electronic tools
| 0 |
There are electronic tools to facilitate clinical risk assessment and adherence to risk mitigation. Two tools currently used in the VA are the Opioid Therapy Risk Report (OTRR) and the Stratification Tool for Opioid Risk Mitigation (STORM). The OTRR allows VA providers to review clinical data related to opioid pain treatment within the electronic medical record (EMR), providing an efficient way of monitoring the data. The STORM tool incorporates co-occurring medical and mental health conditions, SUD, opioid dose, co-prescribed sedatives, and information about prior adverse events and generates estimates of patients’ risk or hypothetical risk when considering initiation of opioid therapy. It quantifies risk for poisoning or suicide-related events and for drug-related events, accidents, falls, and drug-induced conditions over a three-year window. Further, it provides suggestions as to what alternative treatments have not been tried and what risk mitigation strategies need to be applied. Evidence supporting their use is poor but they facilitate providers’ determination of current, past and potential therapies and strategies.
|
Features and overview
| 1,094 |
Which electronic tools are currently used in the VA?
|
the Opioid Therapy Risk Report (OTRR) and the Stratification Tool for Opioid Risk Mitigation (STORM)
| 140 |
There are electronic tools to facilitate clinical risk assessment and adherence to risk mitigation. Two tools currently used in the VA are the Opioid Therapy Risk Report (OTRR) and the Stratification Tool for Opioid Risk Mitigation (STORM). The OTRR allows VA providers to review clinical data related to opioid pain treatment within the electronic medical record (EMR), providing an efficient way of monitoring the data. The STORM tool incorporates co-occurring medical and mental health conditions, SUD, opioid dose, co-prescribed sedatives, and information about prior adverse events and generates estimates of patients’ risk or hypothetical risk when considering initiation of opioid therapy. It quantifies risk for poisoning or suicide-related events and for drug-related events, accidents, falls, and drug-induced conditions over a three-year window. Further, it provides suggestions as to what alternative treatments have not been tried and what risk mitigation strategies need to be applied. Evidence supporting their use is poor but they facilitate providers’ determination of current, past and potential therapies and strategies.
|
Features and overview
| 1,095 |
What does the OTRR do?
|
allows VA providers to review clinical data related to opioid pain treatment within the electronic medical record (EMR), providing an efficient way of monitoring the data
| 252 |
There are electronic tools to facilitate clinical risk assessment and adherence to risk mitigation. Two tools currently used in the VA are the Opioid Therapy Risk Report (OTRR) and the Stratification Tool for Opioid Risk Mitigation (STORM). The OTRR allows VA providers to review clinical data related to opioid pain treatment within the electronic medical record (EMR), providing an efficient way of monitoring the data. The STORM tool incorporates co-occurring medical and mental health conditions, SUD, opioid dose, co-prescribed sedatives, and information about prior adverse events and generates estimates of patients’ risk or hypothetical risk when considering initiation of opioid therapy. It quantifies risk for poisoning or suicide-related events and for drug-related events, accidents, falls, and drug-induced conditions over a three-year window. Further, it provides suggestions as to what alternative treatments have not been tried and what risk mitigation strategies need to be applied. Evidence supporting their use is poor but they facilitate providers’ determination of current, past and potential therapies and strategies.
|
Features and overview
| 1,096 |
What does the STORM tool do?
|
incorporates co-occurring medical and mental health conditions, SUD, opioid dose, co-prescribed sedatives, and information about prior adverse events and generates estimates of patients’ risk or hypothetical risk when considering initiation of opioid therapy. It quantifies risk for poisoning or suicide-related events and for drug-related events, accidents, falls, and drug-induced conditions over a three-year window. Further, it provides suggestions as to what alternative treatments have not been tried and what risk mitigation strategies need to be applied.
| 441 |
There are electronic tools to facilitate clinical risk assessment and adherence to risk mitigation. Two tools currently used in the VA are the Opioid Therapy Risk Report (OTRR) and the Stratification Tool for Opioid Risk Mitigation (STORM). The OTRR allows VA providers to review clinical data related to opioid pain treatment within the electronic medical record (EMR), providing an efficient way of monitoring the data. The STORM tool incorporates co-occurring medical and mental health conditions, SUD, opioid dose, co-prescribed sedatives, and information about prior adverse events and generates estimates of patients’ risk or hypothetical risk when considering initiation of opioid therapy. It quantifies risk for poisoning or suicide-related events and for drug-related events, accidents, falls, and drug-induced conditions over a three-year window. Further, it provides suggestions as to what alternative treatments have not been tried and what risk mitigation strategies need to be applied. Evidence supporting their use is poor but they facilitate providers’ determination of current, past and potential therapies and strategies.
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.