首页> 外文期刊>Pain Physician >Responsible, Safe, and Effective Prescription of Opioids for Chronic Non-Cancer Pain: American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP) Guidelines
【24h】

Responsible, Safe, and Effective Prescription of Opioids for Chronic Non-Cancer Pain: American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP) Guidelines

机译:对慢性非癌性疼痛的阿片类药物负责,安全和有效的处方:美国介入疼痛医师协会(ASIPP)指南

获取原文
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: Opioid use, abuse, and adverse consequences, including death, have escalated at an alarming rate since the 1990s. In an attempt to control opioid abuse, numerous regulations and guidelines for responsible opioid prescribing have been developed by various organizations. However, the US opioid epidemic is continuing and drug dose deaths tripled during 1999 to 2015. Recent data show a continuing increase in deaths due to natural and semisynthetic opioids, a decline in methadone deaths, and an explosive increase in the rates of deaths involving other opioids, specifically heroin and illicit synthetic fentanyl. Contrary to scientific evidence of efficacy and negative recommendations, a significant proportion of physicians and patients (92%) believe that opioids reduce pain and a smaller proportion (57%) report better quality of life. In preparation of the current guidelines, we have focused on the means to reduce the abuse and diversion of opioids without jeopardizing access for those patients suffering from non-cancer pain who have an appropriate medical indication for opioid use.OBJECTIVES: To provide guidance for the prescription of opioids for the management of chronic non-cancer pain, to develop a consistent philosophy among the many diverse groups with an interest in opioid use as to how appropriately prescribe opioids, to improve the treatment of chronic non-cancer pain and to reduce the likelihood of drug abuse and diversion. These guidelines are intended to provide a systematic and standardized approach to this complex and difficult arena of practice, while recognizing that every clinical situation is unique.METHODS: The methodology utilized included the development of objectives and key questions. The methodology also utilized trustworthy standards, appropriate disclosures of conflicts of interest, as well as a panel of experts from various specialties and groups. The literature pertaining to opioid use, abuse, effectiveness, and adverse consequences was reviewed, with a best evidence synthesis of the available literature, and utilized grading for recommendation as described by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ).Summary of Recommendations:i. Initial Steps of Opioid Therapy1. Comprehensive assessment and documentation. (Evidence: Level I; Strength of Recommendation: Strong)2. Screening for opioid abuse to identify opioid abusers. (Evidence: Level II-III; Strength of Recommendation: Moderate)3. Utilization of prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs). (Evidence: Level I-II; Strength of Recommendation: Moderate to strong)4. Utilization of urine drug testing (UDT). (Evidence: Level II; Strength of Recommendation: Moderate)5. Establish appropriate physical diagnosis and psychological diagnosis if available. (Evidence: Level I; Strength of Recommendation: Strong)6. Consider appropriate imaging, physical diagnosis, and psychological status to collaborate with subjective complaints. (Evidence: Level III; Strength of Recommendation: Moderate)7. Establish medical necessity based on average moderate to severe (? 4 on a scale of 0 – 10) pain and/or disability. (Evidence: Level II; Strength of Recommendation: Moderate) 8. Stratify patients based on risk. (Evidence: Level I-II; Strength of Recommendation: Moderate)9. Establish treatment goals of opioid therapy with regard to pain relief and improvement in function. (Evidence: Level I-II; Strength of Recommendation: Moderate)10. Obtain a robust opioid agreement, which is followed by all parties. (Evidence: Level III; Strength of Recommendation: Moderate)ii. Assessment of Effectiveness of Long-Term Opioid Therapy11. Initiate opioid therapy with low dose, short-acting drugs, with appropriate monitoring. (Evidence: Level II; Strength of Recommendation: Moderate)12. Consider up to 40 morphine milligram equivalent (MME) as low dose, 41 to 90 MME as a moderate dose, and greater than 91 MME as high dose. (Evidence: Level II; Strength of Recommendation: Modera
机译:背景:自1990年代以来,阿片类药物的使用,滥用以及包括死亡在内的不良后果以惊人的速度上升。为了控制阿片类药物滥用,各种组织已经制定了许多负责任的阿片类药物处方的规定和指南。但是,美国的阿片类药物流行病仍在持续,从1999年到2015年,药物剂量死亡人数增加了两倍。最近的数据显示,由于天然和半合成阿片类药物造成的死亡人数持续增加,美沙酮死亡人数下降,涉及其他药物的死亡率急剧上升。阿片类药物,特别是海洛因和非法合成的芬太尼。与疗效的科学证据和否定的建议相反,很大比例的医生和患者(92%)认为阿片类药物可减轻疼痛,较小的一部分(57%)则认为生活质量更好。在准备当前指南时,我们集中于减少阿片类药物的滥用和转移而又不危害那些具有适当阿片类药物适应症的非癌性疼痛患者的途径的方法。阿片类药物的处方,用于管理慢性非癌性疼痛,在对阿片类药物的使用感兴趣的许多不同人群中发展出一致的理念,即如何适当地开出阿片类药物,以改善慢性非癌性疼痛的治疗并减少阿片类药物的使用。药物滥用和转移的可能性。这些准则旨在为这一复杂而困难的实践领域提供系统化和标准化的方法,同时认识到每种临床情况都是独特的。方法:所使用的方法包括制定目标和关键问题。该方法还利用了可信赖的标准,利益冲突的适当披露以及来自各个专业和团体的专家小组。审查了与阿片类药物使用,滥用,有效性和不良后果有关的文献,并结合了现有文献的最佳证据,并按照医疗保健研究与质量局(AHRQ)的说明使用了分级推荐的建议。一世。阿片类药物治疗的初始步骤1。全面的评估和记录。 (证据:一级;推荐强度:强)2。筛选阿片类药物滥用,以识别阿片类药物滥用者。 (证据:II-III级;推荐强度:中等)3。利用处方药监测程序(PDMP)。 (证据:I-II级;推荐强度:中到强)4。利用尿液药物测试(UDT)。 (证据:II级;推荐强度:中等)5。建立适当的身体诊断和心理诊断(如果有)。 (证据:一级;推荐强度:强)6。考虑适当的影像学检查,身体诊断和心理状况,以与主观投诉进行协作。 (证据:第三级;推荐强度:中等)7。根据中度至重度(0到10的等级,?4)疼痛和/或残疾来确定医疗必要性。 (证据:II级;推荐强度:中等)8.根据风险对患者进行分层。 (证据:I-II级;推荐强度:中等)9。建立关于减轻疼痛和改善功能的阿片类药物治疗的治疗目标。 (证据:I-II级;推荐强度:中等)10。获得可靠的阿片类药物协议,各方都应遵守。 (证据:三级;推荐强度:中等)ii。长期阿片类药物治疗的效果评估11。在适当的监测下,开始使用小剂量短效阿片类药物治疗。 (证据:II级;推荐强度:中等)12。低剂量时应考虑多达40个吗啡毫克当量(MME),中剂量时应考虑41-90 MME,高剂量时应大于91 MME。 (证据:II级;推荐强度:Modera

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号