| July
19, 2007
Washington
State Agency Medical Directors Group
P.O. Box 44321
Olympia, Washington 98504
Re: The
Washington State Agency Medical Directors Group (AMDG) published guidelines
on Opioid Dosing for Chronic Non-cancer Pain
Dear Sirs,
The American
Pain Society is a multidisciplinary community that brings together a diverse
group of scientists, clinicians, and other professionals to increase the
knowledge of pain and transform public policy and clinical practice to
reduce pain-related suffering. Our overall aim is similar to yours –
provide safe and effective pain relief using scientific, evidence-based
knowledge. As such, we read with concern the recently published guidelines
on Opioid Dosing for Chronic Non-Cancer Pain and would like to offer the
following thoughts:
- We
know of no scientific evidence that the Washington State Agency of Medical
Directors Group's Opioid Dosing Guidelines will improve the safety,
and diminish harm of patients within the state sponsored healthcare
programs who are receiving opioids for chronic non-malignant pain. We
are also extremely concerned with the recent rise in deaths attributed
to opioid misuse, however, we feel that it is imperative that the latest
and most sound scientific evidence be used in the management of any
patient who suffers from pain from any etiology. It is our ultimate
goal as a society, to ensure that the fair and equitable treatment of
pain is available to any patient who suffers from pain.
- We
are worried that the recent emphasis on improving pain control by the
American Pain Society has been misconstrued by the AMDG and others to
mean that opioids must be "aggressively" escalated to achieve
this goal. It is important to clarify with the AMDG and others that
opioids and other non-opioid analgesics should not be withheld due to
unfounded fear and biases. Instead, they should be used in accordance
with the latest scientific evidence and clinical practice guidelines
by adequately trained healthcare professionals.
- We are
troubled that the guidelines are primarily based on one retrospective
study (Franklin et al, 2005). Furthermore, we believe these data to
be flawed. This study in workers compensation patients fails to provide
documentation of the dosage of opioids taken by the 44 patients whose
deaths were determined to be "prescription–opioid related
deaths" rated as definite (32) or probable or possible (12). It
is not clear whether these patients were taking a Schedule II opioid.
Additionally, the authors were not able to report the relationship between
death rates and temporal exposure to opioids. Is the increase in deaths
truly a function of increased exposure to opioids? Moreover, the authors
found that, like the general trend in the US, the number of Schedule
II opioid prescriptions in Washington State increased from 1996 to 2002
(by 2.5 fold in Washington State). Yet, in spite of the steady increase
in Schedule II opioids from 1996 to 2002, the number of opioid related
deaths (definite, probable, and possible) peaked in 2000 at 12 and had
declined to 8 by 2002.
- We are
hopeful that the guidelines will meet their intended outcome "to
aid in reducing death and morbidity related to opioid dosing for treatment
of chronic non-cancer pain." But we are also concerned with the
precedent that the guidelines present to other states considering similar
legislation without knowing the full impact, if any, on the patients
who experience chronic pain in the state of Washington.
- We are
troubled that the current guidelines potentially add unnecessary restrictions
and additional barriers to patients who experience pain, and potentially
discriminate against those patients without a cancer diagnosis and further
worsen medical access for those who do not meet the current criteria.
We believe that the guidelines may introduce unintended consequences
for persons who develop chronic pain as a consequence of the treatment
for cancer.
- We are
disturbed with the defined criteria that identify patients who exhibit
"drug-seeking behavior" since there are no diagnostic behavioral
criteria or accepted medical definition. We are concerned that the premature
identification of a patient as a "drug-seeker" may incorrectly
identify a pseudoaddict, or introduce an unintended burden to other
patients further diminishing the availability of adequate treatment
of their pain.
- We don't
even know whether there are enough pain specialists within the State
of Washington to meet the demand of all the patients that exceed the
120mg/day of morphine equivalents, particularly in rural areas.
We respectfully appreciate your efforts to regulate opioid use in your
state but feel that there is still much more work to do to make these
guidelines practical and appropriate. We offer our society's expertise
to collaborate with AMDG to generate scientifically sound and measurable
outcomes related to these guidelines or to provide assistance in future
or present development of treatment algorithms for pain. It is imperative
for all interested parties to find an optimal balance between harm from
opioids and optimal pain control.
Sincerely,

Judith A.
Paice PhD RN
President |