A systematic review of assessment approaches to predict opioid misuse in people with cancer

被引:8
作者
Keall, Robyn [1 ]
Keall, Paul [2 ]
Kiani, Carly [3 ]
Luckett, Tim [4 ]
McNeill, Richard [5 ,6 ]
Lovell, Melanie [1 ]
机构
[1] HammondCare, Sydney, NSW, Australia
[2] Univ Sydney, ACRF Image X Inst Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
[3] Univ Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia
[4] Univ Technol, Fac Hlth, Sydney, NSW, Australia
[5] Mary Potter Hosp, Wellington, New Zealand
[6] Christchurch Hosp, Dept Clin Pharmacol, Christchurch, New Zealand
关键词
Cancer; Opioid; Pain; Screening; Drug misuse; CHRONIC PAIN; RISK TOOL; DRUG-USE; ONCOLOGY PATIENTS; UNITED-STATES; ABUSE RISK; VALIDATION; ALCOHOLISM; DRINKING; SCREENER;
D O I
10.1007/s00520-022-06895-w
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Context Cancer prevalence is increasing, with many patients requiring opioid analgesia. Clinicians need to ensure patients receive adequate pain relief. However, opioid misuse is widespread, and cancer patients are at risk. Objectives This study aims (1) to identify screening approaches that have been used to assess and monitor risk of opioid misuse in patients with cancer; (2) to compare the prevalence of risk estimated by each of these screening approaches; and (3) to compare risk factors among demographic and clinical variables associated with a positive screen on each of the approaches. Methods Medline, Cochrane Controlled Trial Register, PubMed, PsycINFO, and Embase databases were searched for articles reporting opioid misuse screening in cancer patients, along with handsearching the reference list of included articles. Bias was assessed using tools from the Joanna Briggs Suite. Results Eighteen studies met the eligibility criteria, evaluating seven approaches: Urine Drug Test (UDT) (n = 8); the Screener and Opioid Assessment for Patients with Pain (SOAPP) and two variants, Revised and Short Form (n = 6); the Cut-down, Annoyed, Guilty, Eye-opener (CAGE) tool and one variant, Adapted to Include Drugs (n = 6); the Opioid Risk Tool (ORT) (n = 4); Prescription Monitoring Program (PMP) (n = 3); the Screen for Opioid-Associated Aberrant Behavior Risk (SOABR) (n = 1); and structured/specialist interviews (n = 1). Eight studies compared two or more approaches. The rates of risk of opioid misuse in the studied populations ranged from 6 to 65%, acknowledging that estimates are likely to have varied partly because of how specific to opioids the screening approaches were and whether a single or multi-step approach was used. UDT prompted by an intervention or observation of aberrant opioid behaviors (AOB) were conclusive of actual opioid misuse found to be 6.5-24%. Younger age, found in 8/10 studies; personal or family history of anxiety or other mental ill health, found in 6/8 studies; and history of illicit drug use, found in 4/6 studies, showed an increased risk of misuse. Conclusions Younger age, personal or familial mental health history, and history of illicit drug use consistently showed an increased risk of opioid misuse. Clinical suspicion of opioid misuse may be raised by data from PMP or any of the standardized list of AOBs. Clinicians may use SOAPP-R, CAGE-AID, or ORT to screen for increased risk and may use UDT to confirm suspicion of opioid misuse or monitor adherence. More research into this important area is required. Significance of results This systematic review summarized the literature on the use of opioid misuse risk approaches in people with cancer. The rates of reported risk range from 6 to 65%; however, true rate may be closer to 6.5-24%. Younger age, personal or familial mental health history, and history of illicit drug use consistently showed an increased risk of opioid misuse. Clinicians may choose from several approaches. Limited data are available on feasibility and patient experience. PROSPERO registration number. CRD42020163385.
引用
收藏
页码:5645 / 5658
页数:14
相关论文
共 65 条
  • [1] Opioid Misuse and Abuse: Risk Assessment and Management in Patients with Cancer Pain
    Anghelescu, Doralina L.
    Ehrentraut, Jennifer Harman
    Faughnan, Lane G.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL COMPREHENSIVE CANCER NETWORK, 2013, 11 (08): : 1023 - 1031
  • [2] Random vs Targeted Urine Drug Testing Among Patients Undergoing Long-term Opioid Treatment for Cancer Pain
    Arthur, Joseph
    Lu, Zhanni
    Nguyen, Kristy
    Hui, David
    Prado, Bernard
    Edwards, Tonya
    Bruera, Eduardo
    [J]. JAMA ONCOLOGY, 2020, 6 (04) : 580 - 581
  • [3] Random urine drug testing among patients receiving opioid therapy for cancer pain
    Arthur, Joseph A.
    Tang, Michael
    Lu, Zhanni
    Hui, David
    Nguyen, Kristy
    Rodriguez, Eden Mae
    Edwards, Tonya
    Yennurajalingam, Sriram
    Dalal, Shalini
    Dev, Rony
    Reddy, Akhila
    Tanco, Kimberson
    Haider, Ali
    Liu, Diane D.
    Bruera, Eduardo
    [J]. CANCER, 2021, 127 (06) : 968 - 975
  • [4] Aberrant Opioid Use and Urine Drug Testing in Outpatient Palliative Care
    Arthur, Joseph A.
    Haider, Ali
    Edwards, Tonya
    Waletich-Flemming, Jessica
    Reddy, Suresh
    Bruera, Eduardo
    Hui, David
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PALLIATIVE MEDICINE, 2016, 19 (07) : 778 - 782
  • [5] Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2018, CAUS DEATH AUSTR 201
  • [6] Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, 2019, CANC SER AIOH, V122
  • [7] Screening for substance abuse risk in cancer patients using the Opioid Risk Tool and urine drug screen
    Barclay, Joshua S.
    Owens, Justine E.
    Blackhall, Leslie J.
    [J]. SUPPORTIVE CARE IN CANCER, 2014, 22 (07) : 1883 - 1888
  • [8] BERNADT MW, 1982, LANCET, V1, P325
  • [9] An overview of the patterns of prescription opioid use, costs and related harms in Australia
    Blanch, Bianca
    Pearson, Sallie-Anne
    Haber, Paul S.
    [J]. BRITISH JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY, 2014, 78 (05) : 1159 - 1166
  • [10] Brown R L, 1995, Wis Med J, V94, P135