AI Article Synopsis

  • The study aimed to review various interventions aimed at reducing long-term opioid treatment for chronic non-cancer pain, focusing on factors like dose reduction, pain, function, quality of life, and withdrawal symptoms.
  • A systematic review was conducted, gathering data from multiple databases, leading to the exclusion of many studies due to high risk of bias, with only 36 studies included for analysis.
  • Results showed low to very low certainty in the evidence for most outcomes; however, a moderate certainty indicated that interventions supporting prescribers' adherence to guidelines could improve patient discontinuation of opioids.

Article Abstract

Objective: To review interventions to reduce long term opioid treatment in people with chronic non-cancer pain, considering efficacy on dose reduction and discontinuation, pain, function, quality of life, withdrawal symptoms, substance use, and adverse events.

Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies of interventions.

Data Sources: Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library searched from inception to July 2021. Reference lists and previous reviews were also searched and experts were contacted.

Eligibility Criteria For Study Selection: Original research in English. Case reports and cross sectional studies were excluded.

Data Extraction And Synthesis: Two authors independently selected studies, extracted data, and used the Cochrane risk-of-bias tools for randomised and non-randomised studies (RoB 2 and ROBINS-I). Authors grouped interventions into five categories (pain self-management, complementary and alternative medicine, pharmacological and biomedical devices and interventions, opioid replacement treatment, and deprescription methods), estimated pooled effects using random effects meta-analytical models, and appraised the certainty of evidence using GRADE (grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation).

Results: Of 166 studies meeting inclusion criteria, 130 (78%) were considered at critical risk of bias and were excluded from the evidence synthesis. Of the 36 included studies, few had comparable treatment arms and sample sizes were generally small. Consequently, the certainty of the evidence was low or very low for more than 90% (41/44) of GRADE outcomes, including for all non-opioid patient outcomes. Despite these limitations, evidence of moderate certainty indicated that interventions to support prescribers' adherence to guidelines increased the likelihood of patients discontinuing opioid treatment (adjusted odds ratio 1.5, 95% confidence interval 1.0 to 2.1), and that these prescriber interventions as well as pain self-management programmes reduced opioid dose more than controls (intervention control, mean difference -6.8 mg (standard error 1.6) daily oral morphine equivalent, P<0.001; pain programme control, -14.31 mg daily oral morphine equivalent, 95% confidence interval -21.57 to -7.05).

Conclusions: Evidence on the reduction of long term opioid treatment for chronic pain continues to be constrained by poor study methodology. Of particular concern is the lack of evidence relating to possible harms. Agreed standards for designing and reporting studies on the reduction of opioid treatment are urgently needed.

Review Registration: PROSPERO CRD42020140943.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8977989PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2021-066375DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

opioid treatment
12
interventions reduce
8
reduce long
8
long term
8
term opioid
8
chronic non-cancer
8
non-cancer pain
8
systematic review
8
review meta-analysis
8
non-randomised studies
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!