通过临床权衡平衡阿片类药物处方:疼痛缓解与不良反应,不适,依赖,耐受性/过敏

IF 2.5 4区 管理学 Q3 MANAGEMENT Decision Analysis Pub Date : 2022-02-03 DOI:10.1287/deca.2021.0447
Abdullah Gökçınar, M. Çakanyıldırım, Theodore John Price, Meredith C. B. Adams
{"title":"通过临床权衡平衡阿片类药物处方:疼痛缓解与不良反应,不适,依赖,耐受性/过敏","authors":"Abdullah Gökçınar, M. Çakanyıldırım, Theodore John Price, Meredith C. B. Adams","doi":"10.1287/deca.2021.0447","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the backdrop of the opioid epidemic, opioid prescribing has distinct medical and social challenges. Overprescribing contributes to the ongoing opioid epidemic, whereas underprescribing yields inadequate pain relief. Moreover, opioids have serious adverse effects including tolerance and increased sensitivity to pain, paradoxically inducing more pain. Prescribing trade-offs are recognized but not modeled in the literature. We study the prescribing decisions for chronic, acute, and persistent pain types to minimize the cumulative pain that incorporates opioid adverse effects (discomfort and dependence) and the risk of tolerance or hypersensitivity (THS) developed with opioid use. After finding closed-form solutions for each pain type, we analytically investigate the sensitivity of acute pain prescriptions and examine policies on incorporation of THS, patient handover, and adaptive treatments. Our analyses show that the role of adverse effects in prescribing decisions is as critical as that of the pain level. Interestingly, we find that the optimal prescription duration is not necessarily increasing with the recovery time. We show that not incorporating THS or information curtailment at patient handovers leads to overprescribing that can be mitigated by adaptive treatments. Last, using real-life pain and opioid use data from two sources, we estimate THS parameters and discuss the proximity of our model to clinical practice. This paper has a pain management framework that leads to tractable models. These models can potentially support balanced opioid prescribing after their validation in a clinical setting. Then, they can be helpful to policy makers in assessment of prescription policies and of the controversy around over- and underprescribing.","PeriodicalId":46460,"journal":{"name":"Decision Analysis","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Balanced Opioid Prescribing via a Clinical Trade-Off: Pain Relief vs. Adverse Effects of Discomfort, Dependence, and Tolerance/Hypersensitivity\",\"authors\":\"Abdullah Gökçınar, M. Çakanyıldırım, Theodore John Price, Meredith C. B. Adams\",\"doi\":\"10.1287/deca.2021.0447\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In the backdrop of the opioid epidemic, opioid prescribing has distinct medical and social challenges. Overprescribing contributes to the ongoing opioid epidemic, whereas underprescribing yields inadequate pain relief. Moreover, opioids have serious adverse effects including tolerance and increased sensitivity to pain, paradoxically inducing more pain. Prescribing trade-offs are recognized but not modeled in the literature. We study the prescribing decisions for chronic, acute, and persistent pain types to minimize the cumulative pain that incorporates opioid adverse effects (discomfort and dependence) and the risk of tolerance or hypersensitivity (THS) developed with opioid use. After finding closed-form solutions for each pain type, we analytically investigate the sensitivity of acute pain prescriptions and examine policies on incorporation of THS, patient handover, and adaptive treatments. Our analyses show that the role of adverse effects in prescribing decisions is as critical as that of the pain level. Interestingly, we find that the optimal prescription duration is not necessarily increasing with the recovery time. We show that not incorporating THS or information curtailment at patient handovers leads to overprescribing that can be mitigated by adaptive treatments. Last, using real-life pain and opioid use data from two sources, we estimate THS parameters and discuss the proximity of our model to clinical practice. This paper has a pain management framework that leads to tractable models. These models can potentially support balanced opioid prescribing after their validation in a clinical setting. Then, they can be helpful to policy makers in assessment of prescription policies and of the controversy around over- and underprescribing.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46460,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Decision Analysis\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Decision Analysis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1287/deca.2021.0447\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Decision Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1287/deca.2021.0447","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

在阿片类药物流行的背景下,阿片类药物处方具有明显的医疗和社会挑战。处方过量导致阿片类药物持续流行,而处方不足导致疼痛缓解不足。此外,阿片类药物具有严重的副作用,包括耐受性和对疼痛的敏感性增加,矛盾的是引起更多的疼痛。处方权衡是公认的,但没有在文献中建模。我们研究了慢性、急性和持续性疼痛类型的处方决定,以尽量减少阿片类药物不良反应(不适和依赖)的累积疼痛,以及阿片类药物使用引起的耐受或超敏反应(THS)的风险。在找到每种疼痛类型的封闭形式解决方案后,我们分析了急性疼痛处方的敏感性,并检查了结合三手疗法、患者移交和适应性治疗的政策。我们的分析表明,不良反应在处方决策中的作用与疼痛程度一样重要。有趣的是,我们发现最佳处方持续时间并不一定随着恢复时间的增加而增加。我们表明,在病人移交时不纳入三手烟或信息限制会导致处方过量,这可以通过适应性治疗来缓解。最后,利用来自两个来源的真实疼痛和阿片类药物使用数据,我们估计了三手烟参数,并讨论了我们的模型与临床实践的接近性。本文提供了一个疼痛管理框架,可以生成可处理的模型。这些模型在临床验证后可以潜在地支持平衡阿片类药物处方。然后,它们可以帮助政策制定者评估处方政策以及围绕处方过量和不足的争议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Balanced Opioid Prescribing via a Clinical Trade-Off: Pain Relief vs. Adverse Effects of Discomfort, Dependence, and Tolerance/Hypersensitivity
In the backdrop of the opioid epidemic, opioid prescribing has distinct medical and social challenges. Overprescribing contributes to the ongoing opioid epidemic, whereas underprescribing yields inadequate pain relief. Moreover, opioids have serious adverse effects including tolerance and increased sensitivity to pain, paradoxically inducing more pain. Prescribing trade-offs are recognized but not modeled in the literature. We study the prescribing decisions for chronic, acute, and persistent pain types to minimize the cumulative pain that incorporates opioid adverse effects (discomfort and dependence) and the risk of tolerance or hypersensitivity (THS) developed with opioid use. After finding closed-form solutions for each pain type, we analytically investigate the sensitivity of acute pain prescriptions and examine policies on incorporation of THS, patient handover, and adaptive treatments. Our analyses show that the role of adverse effects in prescribing decisions is as critical as that of the pain level. Interestingly, we find that the optimal prescription duration is not necessarily increasing with the recovery time. We show that not incorporating THS or information curtailment at patient handovers leads to overprescribing that can be mitigated by adaptive treatments. Last, using real-life pain and opioid use data from two sources, we estimate THS parameters and discuss the proximity of our model to clinical practice. This paper has a pain management framework that leads to tractable models. These models can potentially support balanced opioid prescribing after their validation in a clinical setting. Then, they can be helpful to policy makers in assessment of prescription policies and of the controversy around over- and underprescribing.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Decision Analysis
Decision Analysis MANAGEMENT-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
21.10%
发文量
19
期刊最新文献
Measuring and Mitigating the Risk of Advanced Cyberattackers On the Value of Information Across Decision Problems From the Editor: 2023 Clemen–Kleinmuntz Decision Analysis Best Paper Award Reply to “Comment on ‘Whose Judgement? Reflections on Elicitation in Bayesian Analysis’ ” Whose Judgement? Reflections on Elicitation in Bayesian Analysis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1