Inviting an author to review:
Find an author and click ‘Invite to review selected article’ near their name.
Search for authorsSearch for similar articles
5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Health-Related Quality of Life among Chronic Opioid Users, Nonchronic Opioid Users, and Nonopioid Users with Chronic Noncancer Pain

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          <div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="hesr12836-sec-0001"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d443359e275">Objective</h5> <p id="d443359e277">Evaluate the association between opioid therapy and health‐related quality of life ( <span style="fixed-case">HRQ</span>oL) in participants with chronic, noncancer pain ( <span style="fixed-case">CNCP</span>). </p> </div><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="hesr12836-sec-0002"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d443359e286">Data Sources</h5> <p id="d443359e288">Medical Expenditure Panel Survey Longitudinal, Medical Conditions, and Prescription Files. </p> </div><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="hesr12836-sec-0003"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d443359e291">Study Design</h5> <p id="d443359e293">Using a retrospective cohort study design, the Mental Health Component ( <span style="fixed-case">MCS</span>12) and Physical Health Component ( <span style="fixed-case">PCS</span>12) scores of the Short Form‐12 Version 2 were assessed to measure mental and physical <span style="fixed-case">HRQ</span>oL. </p> </div><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="hesr12836-sec-0004"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d443359e305">Data Collection</h5> <p id="d443359e307">Chronic, noncancer pain participants were classified as chronic, nonchronic, and nonopioid users. One‐to‐one propensity score matching was employed to match chronic opioid users to nonchronic opioid users plus nonchronic opioid users and chronic opioid users to nonopioid users. </p> </div><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="hesr12836-sec-0005"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d443359e310">Principal Findings</h5> <p id="d443359e312">A total of 5,876 participants were identified. After matching, <span style="fixed-case">PCS</span>12 was not significantly different between nonchronic versus nonopioid users ( <span style="fixed-case">LSM</span> Diff = −0.98, 95% <span style="fixed-case">CI</span>: −2.07, 0.10), chronic versus nonopioid users ( <span style="fixed-case">LSM</span> Diff = −2.24, 95% <span style="fixed-case">CI</span>: −4.58, 0.10), or chronic versus nonchronic opioid users ( <span style="fixed-case">LSM</span> Diff = −2.23, 95% <span style="fixed-case">CI</span>: −4.53, 0.05). Similarly, <span style="fixed-case">MCS</span>12 was not significantly different between nonchronic versus nonopioid users ( <span style="fixed-case">LSM</span> Diff = 0.76, 95% <span style="fixed-case">CI</span>: −0.46, 1.98), chronic versus nonopioid users ( <span style="fixed-case">LSM</span> Diff = 1.08, 95% <span style="fixed-case">CI</span>: −1.26, 3.42), or chronic versus nonchronic opioid users ( <span style="fixed-case">LSM</span> Diff = −0.57, 95% <span style="fixed-case">CI</span>: −2.90, 1.77). </p> </div><div class="section"> <a class="named-anchor" id="hesr12836-sec-0006"> <!-- named anchor --> </a> <h5 class="section-title" id="d443359e359">Conclusions</h5> <p id="d443359e361">Clinicians should evaluate opioid use in participants with <span style="fixed-case">CNCP</span> as opioid use is not correlated with better <span style="fixed-case">HRQ</span>oL. </p> </div>

          Related collections

          Most cited references37

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found
          Is Open Access

          Clinical guidelines for the use of chronic opioid therapy in chronic noncancer pain.

          Use of chronic opioid therapy for chronic noncancer pain has increased substantially. The American Pain Society and the American Academy of Pain Medicine commissioned a systematic review of the evidence on chronic opioid therapy for chronic noncancer pain and convened a multidisciplinary expert panel to review the evidence and formulate recommendations. Although evidence is limited, the expert panel concluded that chronic opioid therapy can be an effective therapy for carefully selected and monitored patients with chronic noncancer pain. However, opioids are also associated with potentially serious harms, including opioid-related adverse effects and outcomes related to the abuse potential of opioids. The recommendations presented in this document provide guidance on patient selection and risk stratification; informed consent and opioid management plans; initiation and titration of chronic opioid therapy; use of methadone; monitoring of patients on chronic opioid therapy; dose escalations, high-dose opioid therapy, opioid rotation, and indications for discontinuation of therapy; prevention and management of opioid-related adverse effects; driving and work safety; identifying a medical home and when to obtain consultation; management of breakthrough pain; chronic opioid therapy in pregnancy; and opioid-related policies. Safe and effective chronic opioid therapy for chronic noncancer pain requires clinical skills and knowledge in both the principles of opioid prescribing and on the assessment and management of risks associated with opioid abuse, addiction, and diversion. Although evidence is limited in many areas related to use of opioids for chronic noncancer pain, this guideline provides recommendations developed by a multidisciplinary expert panel after a systematic review of the evidence.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The rising prevalence of chronic low back pain.

            National or state-level estimates on trends in the prevalence of chronic low back pain (LBP) are lacking. The objective of this study was to determine whether the prevalence of chronic LBP and the demographic, health-related, and health care-seeking characteristics of individuals with the condition have changed over the last 14 years. A cross-sectional, telephone survey of a representative sample of North Carolina households was conducted in 1992 and repeated in 2006. A total of 4437 households were contacted in 1992 and 5357 households in 2006 to identify noninstitutionalized adults 21 years or older with chronic (>3 months), impairing LBP or neck pain that limits daily activities. These individuals were interviewed in more detail about their health and health care seeking. The prevalence of chronic, impairing LBP rose significantly over the 14-year interval, from 3.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.4%-4.4%) in 1992 to 10.2% (95% CI, 9.3%-11.0%) in 2006. Increases were seen for all adult age strata, in men and women, and in white and black races. Symptom severity and general health were similar for both years. The proportion of individuals who sought care from a health care provider in the past year increased from 73.1% (95% CI, 65.2%-79.8%) to 84.0% (95% CI, 80.8%-86.8%), while the mean number of visits to all health care providers were similar (19.5 [1992] vs 19.4 [2006]). The prevalence of chronic, impairing LBP has risen significantly in North Carolina, with continuing high levels of disability and health care use. A substantial portion of the rise in LBP care costs over the past 2 decades may be related to this rising prevalence.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Methods for constructing and assessing propensity scores.

              To model the steps involved in preparing for and carrying out propensity score analyses by providing step-by-step guidance and Stata code applied to an empirical dataset.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Health Services Research
                Health Serv Res
                Wiley
                00179124
                October 2018
                October 2018
                February 25 2018
                : 53
                : 5
                : 3329-3349
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Division of Pharmaceutical Evaluation and Policy; Department of Pharmacy Practice; University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences College of Pharmacy; Little Rock AR
                [2 ]NIDAT32 Addiction Research Training Program, Psychiatric Research Institute; University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences College of Medicine; Little Rock AR
                [3 ]Department of Health Policy and Management; University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences College of Public Health; Little Rock AR
                Article
                10.1111/1475-6773.12836
                6153159
                29479700
                49d2f5e8-2d3c-434f-b05a-81d4eac759b0
                © 2018

                http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1.1

                http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article