In this study, long-term opioids were frequently initiated for CNMP without a quality use-of-medicine approach. Potential sequelae are inadequate treatment of pain and escalating opioid-related harms. These data suggest a need for improved resourcing and training in opioid management across pain and addictions.

Tapering opioids for chronic pain can be challenging for both patients and prescribers, both of whom may be unsure of what to expect in terms of pain, distress, activity interference, and withdrawal symptoms over the first few weeks and months of the taper. To better prepare clinicians to provide patient-centred tapering support, the current research used prospective longitudinal qualitative methods to capture individual-level variation in patients' experience over the first few months of a voluntary physician-guided taper. The research aimed to identify patterns in individuals' experience of tapering and explore whether patient characteristics, readiness to taper, opioid tapering self-efficacy, or psychosocial context were related to tapering trajectory. Twenty-one patients with chronic noncancer pain commencing tapering of long-term opioid therapy were recruited from a metropolitan tertiary pain clinic (n 5 13) and a regional primary care practice (n 5 8). Semistructured phone interviews were conducted a mean of 8 times per participant over a mean duration of 12 weeks (N 5 173). Four opioid-tapering trajectories were identified, which we characterised as thriving, resilient, surviving, and distressed. High and low readiness to taper was a defining characteristic of thriving and distressed trajectories, respectively. Life adversity was a prominent theme of resilient and distressed trajectories, with supportive relationships buffering the effects of adversity for those who followed a resilient trajectory. Discussion focuses on the implications of these findings for the preparation and support of patients with chronic pain who are commencing opioid tapering.

The pattern of motivating factors towards the psychological, social and behavioural challenges of the management of dependency has a predominantly negative bias. However, this lessens with postgraduate training and OSTP experience. Structural and logistical options are identified to promote OSTP recruitment and retention. GPs resembling class 3 may be more amenable to becoming OSTPs and may be worth targeting for recruitment.

We aimed to evaluate the effect of pain education on opioid prescribing by early-career general practitioners. A brief training workshop was delivered to general practice registrars of a single regional training provider. The workshop significantly reduced "hypothetical" opioid prescribing (in response to paper-based vignettes) in an earlier evaluation. The effect of the training on "actual" prescribing was evaluated using a nonequivalent control group design nested within the Registrar Clinical Encounters in Training (ReCEnT) cohort study: 4 other regional training providers were controls. In ReCEnT, registrars record detailed data (including prescribing) during 60 consecutive consultations, on 3 occasions. Analysis was at the level of individual problem managed, with the primary outcome factor being prescription of an opioid analgesic and the secondary outcome being opioid initiation. Between 2010 and 2015, 168,528 problems were recorded by 849 registrars. Of these, 71% were recorded by registrars in the nontraining group. Eighty-two percentages were before training. Opioid analgesics were prescribed in 4382 (2.5%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.40-2.63) problems, with 1665 of these (0.97%, 95% CI: 0.91-1.04) representing a new prescription. There was no relationship between the training and total prescribing after training (interaction odds ratio: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.75-1.35; P value 0.96). There was some evidence of a reduction in initial opioid prescriptions in the training group (interaction odds ratio: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.48-1.16; P value 0.19). This brief training package failed to increase overall opioid cessation. The inconsistency of these actual prescribing results with "hypothetical" prescribing behavior suggests that reducing opioid prescribing in chronic noncancer pain requires more than changing knowledge and attitudes.

Objective To explore the perspectives of general practitioners (GPs) concerning the risk of opioid misuse in people with cancer and pain and related clinical considerations. Design A qualitative approach using semistructured telephone interviews. Analysis used an integrative approach. setting Primary care. Participants Australian GPs with experience of prescribing opioids for people with cancer and pain. results Twenty-two GPs participated, and three themes emerged. Theme 1 (Misuse is not the main problem) contextualised misuse as a relatively minor concern compared with pain control and toxicity, and highlighted underlying systemic factors, including limitations in continuity of care and doctor expertise. Theme 2 ('A different mindset' for cancer pain) captured participants' relative comfort in prescribing opioids for pain in cancer versus non-cancer contexts, and acknowledgement that compassion and greater perceived community acceptance were driving factors, in addition to scientific support for mechanisms and clinical efficacy. Participant attitudes towards prescribing for people with cancer versus non-cancer pain differed most when cancer was in the palliative phase, when they were unconcerned by misuse. Participants were equivocal about the risk-benefit ratio of long-term opioid therapy in the chronic phase of cancer, and were reluctant to prescribe for disease-free survivors.