BACKGROUND: Many clinicians are reevaluating the use of long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) for chronic pain in response to the opioid crisis and calls from organizations including the Centers for Disease Control & Prevention to limit prescribing of high-dose opioids. However, this practice change is occurring largely in the absence of data regarding patient outcomes. A 2017 systematic review found inconclusive evidence on the impact of LTOT dose reduction and discontinuation on pain severity and function, quality of life, withdrawal symptoms, substance abuse, and adverse effects. This rapid systematic review provides an updated evidence synthesis of patient outcomes following LTOT dose reduction including serious harms such as overdose and suicide. METHODS: We systematically searched numerous bibliographic databases from January 2017 (the end search date of the 2017 systematic review) through May 2020. One reviewer used prespecified criteria to assess articles for inclusion, evaluate study quality, abstract data, and grade strength of evidence, with a second reviewer checking. RESULTS: We included 49 studies-1 systematic review, 34 studies included in that systematic review, and 14 new studies. We prioritized evidence synthesis of 19 studies with the most applicability to the Veteran population and outpatient settings. Among these studies, improvements in mean pain scores were common among patients tapering opioids while participating in intensive multimodal pain interventions and mostly unchanged with less intensive or nonspecific co-interventions. Our confidence in these findings is low due to methodological limitations of the studies. Observational data suggests that serious harms such as opioid overdose and suicidal ideation can occur following opioid dose reduction or discontinuation, but the incidence of these harms at the population level is unknown.
DISCUSSION:The net balance of benefits and harms of LTOT dose reduction for patients with chronic pain is unclear. Clinicians should closely monitor patients during the tapering process given the potential for harm.
Objective: To promote a safety culture and reduce harm, health care systems are adopting high-reliability organization (HRO) principles. This rapid review synthesizes HRO frameworks, metrics, and implementation effects to help inform health systems' efforts toward becoming HROs.Methods: Bibliographic databases were searched from 2010 to 2019.One reviewer used prespecified criteria to assess articles for inclusion, evaluate study quality, extract data, and grade strength of evidence with second reviewer checking.Results: Twenty-three articles were identified: 8 described frameworks, 9 examined metrics, and 9 evaluated implementation outcomes. Five common strategies for HRO implementation emerged (developing leadership, supporting a culture of safety, providing training and learning, building data systems, and implementing quality improvement interventions). The Joint Commission's and Institute for Healthcare Improvement's frameworks emerged as the most comprehensive and widely applicable. The Joint Commission's Oro 2.0 metric for evaluating HRO progress similarly stood out as it was developed through broad stakeholder input and was validated by external researchers. Multicomponent HRO interventions delivered for at least 2 years were associated with improved process and patient safety outcomes. Because each HRO intervention was only supported by a single poor or fair-quality study-none of which contained a concurrent control group-a causal relationship between any HRO initiative and outcomes could not be established.Conclusions: Health care system adoption of HRO principles is associated with improved safety outcomes, yet the level of evidence is low. Priorities for future HRO studies include use of concurrent control groups and examination of specific outcomes measurements.
Multimodal chronic pain care delivery models coupling decision support with proactive treatment monitoring consistently provide clinically relevant improvement in pain and function. Wider implementation of these models should be accompanied by further evaluation of clinical and implementation effectiveness.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.