Prescription Opioid Use Fell Nearly 7% in 2021

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

Prescription opioid use in the United States fell by 6.9% in 2021, the tenth consecutive year the volume of opioid pain medication has declined, according to a new report by the IQVIA Institute, a healthcare data tracking firm.

The decline in opioid consumption came even as prescription drug use overall reached record levels in 2021, fueled in part by new COVID-19 vaccines and therapeutics. Spending on medicines rose 12% to $407 billion last year, according to IQVIA, with 194 billion doses of medication dispensed.

While longer opioid prescriptions were written in the early stages of the pandemic to accommodate patients who didn’t see their doctors as often, prescribing quickly returned to its decade-long downward trend.

“Prescription opioid use has fallen by 48% over the past five years and is now at levels last seen in 2000, reflecting efforts by many stakeholders to limit and manage appropriate prescription opioid use,” IQVIA said in its annual report on medicines in the U.S.      

IQVIA tracks opioid prescriptions in morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs). The company estimates that per capita opioid use fell to 309 MME last year (about 0.84 MME per day), down from a peak of nearly 800 MME in 2011.

Some providers have reduced their opioid prescribing more than others. Since 2016, surgeons, anesthesiologists, dentists and general practitioners have cut their opioid prescribing by over 50 percent, while nurse practitioners and physician assistants have reduced their prescribing by 27 percent.

Prescription Opioid Use and by Prescriber Specialty

Opioid consumption by Americans has fallen so sharply in recent years that Canada, Australia and several European countries have overtaken the U.S. and become the highest consumers of opioid medication. A recent study ranks the U.S. as 8th globally in per capita opioid sales.

The decline in U.S. opioid prescribing has failed to stop the surge in overdoses. The CDC estimates that 106,854 people died from drug overdoses in the 12-month period ending November 2021, with drug deaths more than doubling in the last six years. Synthetic opioids – primarily illicit fentanyl – were involved in about two-thirds of fatal overdoses in the past year.

Patients Blamed for Diversion 

Despite the historic decline in prescription opioid use, some politicians continue to blame opioid medication, prescribers and even patients for the nation’s overdose epidemic.

In comments recently submitted to the CDC on its revised opioid guideline, West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey and 10 other state attorneys general said the agency needs to do more to prevent the diversion of prescription opioids.

“Diversion must remain a key consideration of any prescribing guideline,” said Morrisey.

“Although drug dealers and unethical physicians are responsible for much of the opioid diversion nationwide, legitimate prescriptions remain a prime source of diversion, too. Diverted opioids most commonly reach drug abusers through friends and family members who filled a legitimate prescription.

“The amount of opioids prescribed in recent years has been excessive and far beyond the amount necessary to support legitimate medical need.”

— Patrick Morrisey, West Virginia Attorney General

“Indeed, the amount of opioids prescribed in recent years has been excessive and far beyond the amount necessary to support legitimate medical need. And over-prescription allows legitimate prescriptions to fall into the hands of patients’ family and friends.”

How common is it for prescription opioids to be diverted? Not common at all, according to the DEA’s National Drug Threat Assessment, an annual report that estimates less than 1% of legally prescribed opioids are diverted.  “The number of opioid dosage units available on the retail market and opioid thefts and losses reached their lowest levels in nine years,” the DEA’s 2020 report found.

Despite this, Morrisey puts the onus on pain patients to prove that they’re not abusing or selling their prescriptions. He and the other attorneys general called for routine drug testing of pain patients – rejecting evidence that fraud is common is the drug testing industry and that widely used point-of-care urine tests often give false results that lead to patient abandonment.

“The given reasons that toxicology screenings might lead to ‘stigmatization,’ encourage ‘inappropriate termination from care,’ or be ‘misinterpreted’ are unsatisfactory,” Morrisey wrote. “First, what stigma would the patient face? Diagnostic results are private information. The only people who would know that the test is performed are the patient and the prescriber. The prescriber is already familiar with the patient’s prescriptions, so this process would not reveal any new information -- unless, of course, the patient had lied or not followed the prescriber’s directions.”

Remarkably, the 7-page letter from Morrisey never acknowledges that most drug deaths involve street drugs, not prescription opioids, and makes no mention of fentanyl. The most recent overdose data from West Virginia – Morrisey’s home state – indicates nearly 3 out of 4 drug deaths involve fentanyl.    

Morrisey’s letter was co-signed by the attorneys general of Arkansas, Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi,
Nebraska, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, Kentucky and Virginia.

FDA Warns Supplements for Pain Contain Undeclared Drugs

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is warning consumers not to purchase or use dietary supplements marketed for pain relief under the brand names “Artri King” or “Ortiga” due to potentially dangerous ingredients not listed on their labels. Use of the products has led to at least one death, according to the FDA.

The Artri King and Ortiga supplements are promoted as treatments for arthritis, muscle aches, osteoporosis, bone cancer and other painful conditions – and list ingredients such as glucosamine, turmeric and Omega 3. But FDA laboratory analyses found the supplements also contain undeclared drugs such as steroids, muscle relaxants and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs):

• Dexamethasone (a corticosteroid) is commonly used to treat inflammatory conditions. It can impair a person’s ability to fight an infection and at high doses can cause increased blood glucose levels, changes in blood pressure, damage to bones, psychiatric problems and adrenal dysfunction.

• Diclofenac sodium (a NSAID) can raise the risk of cardiovascular problems, such as heart attack and stroke; serious gastrointestinal damage, including bleeding, ulcers, and fatal tears of the stomach and intestines; and liver toxicity that can result in death or the need for a liver transplant.

• Methocarbamol (a muscle relaxant) can cause sedation, dizziness and low blood pressure.

Artri King advertisement

The FDA urges consumers taking the supplements to immediately talk to a healthcare provider about safely discontinuing their use because suddenly stopping the undeclared drugs may be dangerous. The drugs may also interact with other medications a person is taking.

The FDA said it has received reports of adverse events, including liver toxicity and death, associated with the use of Artri Ajo King supplements since the agency issued its first warning on January 5, 2022. A second warning about Artri King was issued this week.

The FDA’s new warnings include Ortiga Mas Ajo Rey and Ortiga Mas Ajo Rey Extra Forte supplements, which are promoted as treatments for joint pain and arthritis.

Artri King and Ortiga sold their products on various websites, including Amazon, Walmart and E-Bay, as well as some retail stores, primarily targeting Spanish-speaking consumers.

Acetaminophen Warning Labels Ineffective

Sometimes warnings from government health agencies don’t have their intended impact. Such is the case for warnings from Health Canada about taking high doses of acetaminophen, a pain reliever widely used in over-the-counter medicines for headache, cough, cold and flu.

Product labels for acetaminophen were changed in Canada in 2009 to warn of the risk of possible liver damage. In 2016, the labeling was updated with additional information about safe dosing and to identify products containing acetaminophen.

But those changes did not decrease rates of hospitalization for acetaminophen overdoses, according to a new study published in CMAJ (Canadian Medical Association Journal).  In an analysis of more than 12 000 hospital admissions for acetaminophen overdoses in Canada between 2004 and 2020, researchers found the updated warning labels had little impact.

"We found that changes to acetaminophen labels that communicated the risks of overdose and the presence of acetaminophen in over-the-counter products did not affect rates of hospital admission for accidental acetaminophen overdose, ICU admission for accidental acetaminophen overdose and admission for acetaminophen overdoses involving opioids," writes lead author Dr. Tony Antoniou, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Unity Health Toronto.

Previous research has found that less than half of patients regularly read labels for over-the counter analgesics, and only 26% read the active ingredients before using them the first time. Acetaminophen is used in so many different products that consumers may be unaware how much they’re taking. As a result, up to 6% of patients exceed the maximum daily recommended dose.

The FDA warned U.S. consumers about the risk of acetaminophen causing liver injury in 2009. Five years later, the agency told manufacturers to stop selling drug products with more than 325 milligrams of acetaminophen per dose.

Those actions have done little to prevent adverse reactions to acetaminophen. According to the FDA’s Adverse Events Reporting System, nearly 2,800 adverse events involving acetaminophen were reported in 2009. By 2021, the number of adverse events had grown to over 15,000, a 440% increase. Over 27,000 drug deaths involving acetaminophen were reported from 2009 to 2021.

Cannabis Legalization Reduced Rx Drug Use for Several Conditions, Not Just Pain

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

Cannabis products are often touted for their pain relieving properties and some studies have shown that medical marijuana can even help patients reduce their use of opioids.

But a large new study by researchers at Cornell University found that legalization of recreational marijuana significantly reduced demand for a broad range of prescription drugs used to treat depression, anxiety, seizures and other health conditions.

The study, published in the journal Health Economics, looked at prescription data for Medicaid patients in all 50 states from 2011 to 2019, focusing on 11 states where the recreational use of cannabis was legalized: Arizona, Alaska, California, Colorado, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada, Oregon, Vermont and Washington.

Researchers found significant reductions in Medicaid prescribing rates for pain and five other condition-specific drug classes after the first year of legalization:

• -12.2% Anxiety

• -11.1% Depression

• -10.8% Sleep  

• -10.7% Psychosis

•  -9.5% Seizures

•    -8% Pain

Prescribing rates for the six conditions declined even more in the second and third years after recreational cannabis was legalized.

"These results have important implications," wrote lead author Shyam Raman, a doctoral student in the Cornell Jeb E. Brooks School of Public Policy. "The reductions in drug utilization that we find could lead to significant cost savings for state Medicaid programs. The results also indicate a potential harm reduction opportunity, as pharmaceutical drugs often come with dangerous side effects or – as with opioids – potential for misuse.”

Raman and his colleagues did not see a measurable change in the prescribing of drugs used to treat nausea, spasticity or glaucoma. They also note that their study did not look at the health of patients who stopped or reduced their use of prescription drugs, or at the long-term effects of substituting cannabis for pharmaceuticals.

A small study at Harvard Medical School recently found that chronic pain patients reported significant improvements in their pain, sleep, mood, anxiety and quality of life after six months of cannabis therapy.

Recreational cannabis is now legal in 18 states and Washington, DC, while medical marijuana is legal in 37 states and Washington, DC. Cannabis has become so popular — and accessible — that a recent Harris poll found that twice as many Americans are using cannabis or cannabidiol (CBD) to manage their pain than opioids.

While the findings are intriguing, the small number of patients involved in most cannabis studies makes it hard to draw firm conclusions. In 2021, two professional pain societies – the International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) and the Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists -- released policy statements saying they could not endorse the use of cannabis for pain because there are no large, high-quality clinical trials of cannabis as an analgesic.

Mistrust Shadows CDC Over New Opioid Dose Guidance

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

Pain patients and healthcare providers are giving mixed reviews to proposed changes to the CDC opioid guideline, according to a large new survey that found many are skeptical the revisions will make doctors more willing to prescribe opioids. Others fear the revised draft could lead to even lower and ineffective doses of opioids being prescribed.

Over 2,500 patients, providers and caregivers responded to PNN’s survey on the revised opioid guideline, which is intended to undo some of the damage caused by the agency’s 2016 guideline.

States, insurers, regulators and law enforcement made many of the original guideline’s voluntary recommendations mandatory, resulting in millions of patients being abruptly tapered or taken off opioids. Fearing scrutiny or even prosecution for “overprescribing” opioids, some doctors stopped treating pain altogether.

Like the original guideline, the revised draft still discourages the use of opioids, but clearly states the CDC’s recommendations are intended “to support, not supplant, clinical judgment” and “should not be applied as inflexible standards of care.”

When asked if the revised 211-page guideline is an improvement over the original, only four out of ten people (39%) said it was “improved” or “much improved.”  Most respondents said it was about the same or even worse.

“It is very long and involved but seems like a bait and switch. Starts out speaking to the damage done by 2016 guideline. Then seems to restrict needed medication even more,” a patient told us. 

“Both the original and the revised guidelines are fraught with politics. Nothing's changed. The guidelines are still as harmful as they were when they were published in 2016. No appreciable improvements have been made,” said another. 

IS THE REVISED GUIDELINE AN IMPROVEMENT OVER 2016 GUIDELINE?

“It looks like a step in the right direction, but I'm not sure. I don't think the CDC should be interfering between doctors and their patients,” another patient said.  “My current doctor had his practice raided in a Gestapo-like action that found zero violations. CDC and DEA need to back off and let doctors treat their patients.”

50 MME Perceived As New Hard Limit

The 2016 guideline strongly encouraged doctors not to write prescriptions that exceed doses of 90 morphine milligram equivalents (MME) per day. That 90 MME limit has been dropped from the revised draft, but doctors are still urged to be cautious about going over 50 MME because higher doses have “diminishing returns in benefits relative to risks.”

The language about 50 MME is essentially unchanged from the 2016 guideline, but many patients and providers are worried about it. Over 97% of survey respondents said they are “somewhat concerned” or “very concerned” that 50 MME will be seen as the new hard limit for doses, a level many consider inadequate for pain relief.

“The CDC is assuming that, by reducing the misapplied 90 MME standard to 50 MME, it will reduce misapplication of the standard. Faulty logic. It will, in fact, make it even harder for pain patients to be prescribed more than 50 MME, and the result will be more people in more pain and an increase in pain patient suicides,” one patient told us.

“There should be NO MME! It is too specific to use for everyone. We shouldn't be treated all the same. Each person's pain is different. It was bad enough when it was 90, to now reduce it to 50 MME is just awful,” another patient wrote.  

“50 MME will be the new 90 MME. That’s the crux of it, despite the flowery fenestration and hollow words that 2016 gave the wrong impression. They are merely patronizing us, while lowering the guidelines for how much doctors will actually prescribe,” said another.

ARE YOU CONCERNED 50 MME WILL BE SEEN AS THE NEW HARD LIMIT FOR OPIOIDS?

“There should be no specific numbers concerning daily dosages. This should be between a patient and their doctor. All of the state laws that control opioid medications need to be overturned and the CDC needs to stop attempting to practice medicine,” a patient said.

‘Leave Pain Management to the Experts’

People are also skeptical that the revisions will ease doctors’ concerns about prescribing opioids. Nearly two-thirds (61%) said the changes won’t make doctors more willing to prescribe the drugs. 

“I'm glad they are changing, but I think the damage has already been done. My doctor took me off pain meds completely and life has been a living hell! Now that he's done that, I don't think he will be open to prescribing them again no matter how many chronic pain issues I have!” said a patient. 

“My doctors took me off pain meds because they were afraid of losing their license and they still are. I sent (them) the link to the new guidelines and they still will not do anything for my pain,” another patient said. “One doctor said, ‘If we give pain meds to our patients who need it, CDC will still be after us for giving pain meds so we can’t take that chance.’” 

DO YOU THINK REVISIONS WILL MAKE DOCTORS MORE WILLING TO PRESCRIBE OPIOIDS?

“I think the CDC needs to keep his nose out of providers business. I’ve been practicing pain management for 22 years,” a doctor told us. “The CDC guidelines of 2016 have ruined untold lives because they stuck their nose somewhere they shouldn’t have. Leave pain management to the experts and let them decide what each patient needs based on their individual condition.” 

Guideline Expansion

Patients and providers are a bit more receptive about the guideline being expanded to include recommendations for treating short-term acute pain (55%), as well as a handful of specific pain conditions, such as low back pain and migraine (53%).  

Patients with severe constant pain — known an intractable pain — feel left out of the guideline. The word “intractable” is not even mentioned in the draft revision. While some types of severe pain, like cancer pain and sickle cell pain, are specifically excluded from the guideline, others are not.

“I wish that consideration would be given for patients who have intractable pain and have already jumped through the hoops of therapy and other treatments and have found that they didn’t help. It is beyond discouraging to have to repeat trials of treatments that never work for that particular patient,” said one patient.

“There is no difference in cancer and non-cancer pain. Pain is pain. If they’re going to include any conditions (which I don’t think they should) they should recognize rare and incurable illnesses, not just low back pain, sickle cell, and cancer,” another patient wrote. 

End Mandatory Policies

Large majorities also think the CDC needs to do a better job tracking the impact of its guideline on patients (95%) and making sure it is not used to create mandatory policies (96%).

The American Medical Association has even recommended that the CDC undertake a “a national marketing and communications campaign” to make clear to law enforcement and healthcare providers that the revised guideline should not be used like its predecessor to adopt rules that replace individualized patient care. 

Many of our survey respondents agree. Without the elimination of laws and policies that dictate how pain should be treated, no amount of revisions to the guideline will not undo the damage the CDC’s recommendations have already caused. 

“It should be made clear to the doctors willing, but currently afraid, to prescribe opioids now for fear of fines, loss of income and even jail, that they won't be penalized for properly caring for their patients,” said one patient. “These doctors feel their livelihood has been threatened just for doing their job, which is to help people in pain. They are no longer doing that.” 

For more survey findings, including whether respondents think the CDC guideline should be revised or revoked, click here. You can see the full survey results here.

The CDC recently close a public comment period on the guideline revisions. Over 5,400 comments have been received and publicly posted, which you can read here. The CDC is not expected to adopt the final version of its revised guideline until late this year.  

Too Little, Too Late: Patients and Providers Say Changes to CDC Opioid Guideline Inadequate

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

Proposed changes to the CDC’s opioid prescribing guideline are inadequate and will not undo the damage caused to patients and the practice of pain management, according to a large new survey by Pain News Network.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released a long-awaited draft revision of its 2016 guideline in February, giving healthcare providers more flexibility in how they manage pain with opioids. Although voluntary, the original guideline was widely misapplied as a rigid “standard of care” by many states, insurers, doctors and law enforcement, causing millions of patients to be taken off opioids or tapered to lower doses.

The revised guideline states that “opioids can be essential medications for the management of pain” and encourages doctors to use their own best judgement when prescribing them. But many patients and providers believe the changes don’t go far enough and may even make the crisis in pain care worse.

“Appreciate the effort, but too little too late. These revisions are like trying to prevent disaster by course correcting the Titanic after it hit the iceberg,” one patient told us. “The revisions offer no protection against overzealous DEA interference and prosecution, and are meaningless in court. Until the draconian laws spawned by the guidelines are changed, things will only continue to get worse.”

“I believe it is a small step in the right direction, though the damage has already been done. The doctors who truly care about their patients and would like to help them are still terrified of the potential repercussions from the governing bodies,” another patient said.

“In 45 years of treating patients with pain, I have never seen it so difficult for patients to have their reports of pain taken seriously and get access to pain treatment,” a doctor said. “Patients often feel treated like addicts, and have had many professionals and family members supporting that erroneous and stigmatizing label.”

‘I Barely Leave the House’

Over 2,500 patients, providers and caregivers in the U.S. responded to PNN’s survey, the vast majority (94%) identifying themselves as patients with either chronic or short-term acute pain.

Over half the patients (57%) rated the quality of their pain care as poor or very poor. Only one in five (20%) rated it good or very good.

This was the fifth survey we’ve conducted on the CDC guideline. Like the others, people expressed strong opinions about the agency’s recommendations and how they’ve impacted pain care.

“My pain medication was involuntarily reduced by 75% since the the last guideline was published,” a patient told us. “Now I barely leave the house. I can't do my physical therapy due to excessive pain.”

HOW WOULD YOU RATE THE CURRENT QUALITY OF YOUR PAIN CARE?

“The 2016 guidelines caused me to have to go on disability, spend 20 hours a day in bed due to severe back pain, and sell a bank consulting company that I had run successfully for 20 years. The CDC needs to get out of pain medicine,” another patient said.

Should CDC Have Opioid Guideline?

When asked if the CDC should even have guidelines for pain management and opioid prescribing, eight out of ten respondents (84%) said no. Many said the agency overstepped its authority.

“It is outside the CDC's charter and purpose to publish opioid guidelines. If an opioid guideline is needed, that would be the FDA's responsibility. Why is our government even allowing the CDC to do this? They are expending resources on something that is unnecessary and outside of their area of responsibility,” a patient wrote.

“The "D" in "CDC' is for "disease." Pain is not a disease. CDC should stick to its mission,” said another patient. 

“The CDC should not be allowed to regulate pain medications. The CDC conveniently made a disease to justify getting involved in an area that was not their area to regulate. The guidelines were biased against chronic pain. The (guideline) panel was biased by people with preconceived ideas,” a provider wrote. 

‘Made Each Day a Living Hell’

Asked if the 2016 opioid guideline improved the quality of pain care or made it worse, nearly nine out of ten respondents (88%) said pain care in the U.S. was significantly worse. Only 2% believe the guideline improved pain care. 

“I had a friend that was seeing a pain management physician, and he was on high dose opiates for 10 years due to a car accident, and because of the 2016 guidelines, his doctor became very fearful and took him off his meds,” a patient told us. “That person committed suicide.”

“CDC regulations may have saved the lives of some addiction-prone people, but it's made each day a living hell for millions of us with progressive chronic pain,” another patient said.

“The damage has been done. Patients are still dead, physicians are still terrified, and these deaths and loss of practice were totally unnecessary. It is a disgusting example of ill-informed government over reach,” said another.

DID 2016 GUIDELINE IMPROVE PAIN CARE OR MAKE IT WORSE?

‘Pain Drove Me to Street Drugs’

Perhaps the most damning assessment of the 2016 guideline is that it made the opioid crisis worse – an opinion shared by nearly eight out of ten survey respondents (78%). When denied access to opioids, some patients have turned to street drugs.

“Chronic pain drove me to use street drugs, including fentanyl, when all I needed was a doctor to prescribe a safe medicine for me,” a patient told us. “It's messed up I have to do this for relief.”

“Patients know about their pain, doctors know their patients, the CDC does not know individual patients. Making it harder to get much needed medications is what causes people to try and obtain opioids illegally,” said a patient.

“People in chronic pain who cannot get relief from doctors are turning to street drugs - and THEN getting hooked. The CDC is CAUSING drug addiction,” wrote another patient.

“The people who benefit from the CDC guidelines are lawyers, politicians and drug dealers. The drug dealers can sit back and rake in the money while the CDC, lawyers and politicians do their work for them.”

DO YOU THINK THE 2016 GUIDELINE MADE THE OPIOID CRISIS WORSE?

 ‘Revoke the Guidelines’

What should be done with the 2016 guideline? Should it be revised? Can it be fixed? Nearly two-thirds of respondents (63%) believe it should be completely revoked or withdrawn. About 36% believe changes are needed to make opioid medication more accessible.

“The CDC needs to completely revoke the 2016 guidelines and let trained professionals treat their patients for pain. Unfortunately, some of the damage that was done is irreversible and some patients have lost their lives as a consequence, and that lies squarely on the shoulders and consciousnesses of the CDC,” a provider told us.

“DESTROY IT NOW! No updates are needed,” a patient wrote. “Just get rid of these guidelines completely and get out of the middle, coming between a doctor and his pain patient, as well as the patient and their pharmacy.”

“Revoke the guidelines and revoke the CDC’s ability to have anything to do with medications, leave that to the FDA and doctors. Also revoke the DEA’s ability to prosecute and/or harass doctors and make them focus on drug dealers and cartels,” another patient wrote.

WHAT SHOULD BE DONE WITH 2016 GUIDELINE?

‘CDC Has Lost All Credibility’

Given all the problems created by the 2016 guideline and the lengthy delay in revising it, many people have lost faith in the CDC — once one of the most trusted government agencies in the U.S. Asked if the CDC could be trusted to handle the revision of the opioid guideline in an unbiased and scientific manner, nearly 96% said no.

“I do not and will never trust them. This revision is nothing more than putting lipstick on a pig,” a patient said.

“The CDC has lost all credibility with me. They lie, falsify records to suit their argument, pick and choose things in studies to support their argument, and they have anti-opioid zealots writing these guidelines. Clear conflict of interest! CDC and DEA need to get the hell out of my doctor-patient relationship!” said another patient.

“The CDC were warned their Guidelines would harm patients, and they moved forward anyway. They refused to monitor harm to patients or acknowledge it. The CDC's unethical behavior continues over and over at shocking levels. They have broken the public trust over and over. Nothing they've written can be trusted after these deliberate and intentional unethical choices,” a patient wrote.

For more survey findings, including what respondents think about the CDC’s new guidance about doses, click here. You can see the full survey results here.

Overdose Deaths Double for Teenagers Amid Fentanyl Surge

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

Drug deaths among U.S. teenagers have risen sharply in the last two years, according to a new study that found the number of fatal overdoses doubled for adolescents aged 14 to 18 years.

In 2019, there were 492 drug deaths among adolescents. In 2021, there were an estimated 1,146 fatal overdoses, a 133% increase.

The vast majority of adolescent drug deaths last year involved illicit fentanyl (77%), followed by benzodiazepines (13%), methamphetamines (10%) and cocaine (7%). Less than 6% of the overdoses among teens involved a prescription opioid.

The study findings, reported in the journal JAMA, reflect what is happening in the overall U.S. population, with drug overdoses rising to record levels. They also mark the reversal of a decade long trend of fewer overdose deaths among teens, which coincided with declining rates of illicit drug use.

Researchers say adolescents may be unaware or naive about the risks posed by fentanyl, a synthetic opioid up to 100 times more potent than morphine and 50 times stronger than heroin. In a prescription, fentanyl plays a valuable role in treating severe pain, but as a street drug it can be deadly

“Beginning in 2020, adolescents experienced a greater relative increase in overdose mortality than the overall population, attributable in large part to fatalities involving fentanyls,” lead author Joseph Friedman, MPH, University of California, Los Angeles, reported in the journal JAMA.

“In the context of decreasing adolescent drug use rates nationally, these shifts suggest heightened risk from illicit fentanyls, which have variable and high potency. Since 2015, fentanyls have been increasingly added to counterfeit pills resembling prescription opioids, benzodiazepines, and other drugs, which adolescents may not identify as dangerous and which may be playing a key role in these shifts.”

U.S. Adolescent Overdose Deaths

SOURCE: jama

Friedman and his colleagues found the highest overdose rates among Native American, Alaska Native and Latino adolescents, reflecting what they called a “wider pattern of increasing racial and ethnic inequalities” in drug deaths.

Fentanyl is even killing kids who have not reached their teenage years. In California, a boy was recently arrested and charged with murder in the death of 12-year-old Dalilah Guerrero. The 16-year-old suspect allegedly sold a counterfeit pill made with fentanyl to the girl, who overdosed after crushing and snorting the tablet at a party in San Jose.

The spike in adolescent drug deaths comes even as substance abuse by teens fell to record lows. An annual survey by the University of Michigan found significant declines in all types of drug use by adolescents in 2021, with the use of prescription opioids falling to the lowest level in nearly two decades.    

DEA Warns of Fentanyl Mass Overdoses

Public health experts and law enforcement agencies are growing increasingly alarmed by the rising number of fentanyl overdoses. Last week, the DEA warned of a nationwide spike in fentanyl-related mass overdose events, in which three or more overdoses occur in the same location.

In the past three months, at least seven mass overdoses were reported in Florida, Texas, Colorado, Nebraska, Missouri and Washington, DC, resulting in 29 deaths. Three people died in a hotel room in Cortez, Colorado after ingesting what that they thought were 30mg oxycodone pills, but were actually counterfeit pills containing fentanyl.

“Tragic events like these are being driven by fentanyl. Fentanyl is highly-addictive, found in all 50 states, and drug traffickers are increasingly mixing it with other types of drugs — in powder and pill form — in an effort to drive addiction and attract repeat buyers,” DEA Administrator Anne Milgram said in a letter to federal, state and local law enforcement agencies. 

“We recommend that the members of your offices assume that all drugs encountered during enforcement activities now contain fentanyl. Given fentanyl’s extreme toxicity and the increases we are seeing in the distribution of polydrug substances containing fentanyl, please take all the precautions you would take when handling fentanyl whenever you interdict any illicit substance.”

A recent study by the National Institute of Drug Abuse estimated that over 9.6 million counterfeit pills containing fentanyl were seized by U.S. law enforcement agencies last year.

Deadline Nears for Public Comments on Revised CDC Opioid Guideline

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

The public comment period on the revised draft of the CDC’s opioid prescribing guideline ends Monday, April 11th. So far, over 4,200 comments have been submitted in the Federal Register. You can leave a comment and read the ones already submitted by clicking here. A final revised guideline is not expected to be released by the CDC until late this year.

Like the original guideline, the revised version still maintains that opioids should not be used as a first line or routine therapy for pain, but takes a more flexible approach to dosing. Providers are urged to weigh the individual needs of each patient and not take a one-size-fits-all approach to pain care.

“It’s important to point out that the guideline is not final and the step that we’re at now is a real critical point in the process to wrestle with and get feedback,” Christopher Jones, PharmD, Acting Director of the CDC’s National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, told PNN in February.

“And that’s why it’s important that we hear from readers of Pain News Network to get feedback, to get that experience, so as we move toward a final guideline, we can incorporate that feedback. We hope that insurers, medical community, law enforcement and others will also review the guideline and provide feedback.”

Does 50 MME replace 90 MME?

Perhaps the most controversial change in the opioid guideline is the elimination of dose thresholds. The original guideline strongly encouraged providers not to exceed doses of 90 morphine milligram equivalents (MME) per day. That 90 MME limit has been dropped from the revised draft, but providers are still urged to be cautious about going over 50 MME because higher doses have “diminishing returns in benefits relative to risks.”

That change has led to significant confusion about what CDC is trying to do. Many patients are concerned that 50 MME will be seen as the new recommended limit, a dose they consider low for severe pain.

“Does the 50 MMEs replace the 90 MMEs? This is asking for more and more suicides. Much of the proposed guidelines are the same except you removed 90 MMEs and replaced it with 50 MMEs. Go back to the beginning and start over,” Pamela Hoard wrote in her comment.

“It is ridiculous to put a numerical number, such as 50 MME/day, to a risk/benefit outcome when there is no scientific evidence to support MME's,” wrote Joe Benotz, who said he was a pharmacist. “Using unvalidated MME to guide dosing opioid pain meds has in the past led to significant harms to pain patients. Continued use of MME numbers will cause more harm in the future.”

“I'm a doctor in Michigan who has lost his license because of the 90 MME requirement. It doesn't matter if you add caveats, prosecutors see a limit and it becomes the law. The 50 MME ‘suggestion’ is even worse,” wrote Jonathan Roberston.

The anti-opioid activist group Physicians for Responsible Opioid Prescribing (PROP) posted a letter in the Federal Register supporting many of the guideline changes, including the cautionary language about exceeding 50 MME. PROP continues to maintain that long-term use of opioids is too risky.

“Available evidence indicates modest benefits of opioids for acute pain relative to placebo, while benefits for chronic pain have not been shown,” PROP said. “New evidence also demonstrates significant risks of high dose opioids (>50 MME/day) and shows that alternatives to opioids often provide equal or superior benefit with a markedly better safety profile. These are important findings which PROP fully supports being widely disseminated to medical professionals and to the public.”

Medical Societies Weigh In

Other medical societies and physician groups generally support the guideline changes, but with important caveats. The American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) is concerned about the CDC making new recommendations for treating postoperative pain that are based on “inconsistent” evidence from a small number of clinical trials.

“The agency fails to recognize the complexities around the many different types of surgery that require different forms of pain control, especially that some patient populations may need more pain relief and different therapies than others,” the ASA said in a letter that basically told the CDC to stay in its lane.

“ASA recommends that the agency note in the updated Guideline that clinicians defer to professional medical society guidelines and standards of care for surgical procedures. Medical specialty societies, including ASA, are the experts in perioperative pain care, including postsurgical pain, and are best suited to develop clinical guidelines in this specific area.”

In a move apparently timed to preempt the CDC, the ASA recently joined the American Medical Association and 13 other medical societies in releasing new advice for managing postoperative pain in “complex patients,” such as those with chronic pain and those taking opioids prior to surgery. The societies said patients should be allowed to stay on opioids before, during and after surgery.

Other medical organizations urged the CDC to avoid the mistakes of the past, such as allowing insurers, states, regulators and law enforcement to adopt its voluntary recommendations as inflexible standards of practice.  

“It is imperative that the CDC assure the new guidelines emphasize not only support for safe, quality pain care, but also strive for clarity to prevent rigid application of the guidelines and prevent misunderstandings and misapplications that may result in substandard care and needless suffering by patients with unrelieved pain,” said Maureen Cooney, DNP, President of the American Society for Pain Management Nursing.

Other professional societies took offense that their particular specialties were omitted or only briefly covered in the revised guideline.

The American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine urged the CDC to include a “robust discussion” on the use of nerve blocks, epidural steroid injections and other interventional pain procedures.

The American Association of Neurological Surgeons said it was “disappointed” that the revised guideline “fails to adequately explore” implanted neuromodulation devices such as spinal cord stimulators.

And the American Psychological Association was offended by “the obvious, and unfortunate, omission of clinical hypnosis” from the guideline as an alternative pain therapy.

Can Opioids Be Safely Used with Cannabis?

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

Many doctors who prescribe opioids to pain patients tell them not to mix opioids with cannabis – fearing a combination of the two could raise the risk of addiction and overdose. Some doctors will stop prescribing opioids to patients or even discharge them if cannabis is detected in their drug tests.

But a new animal study suggests that cannabidiol (CBD) and tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) – the active ingredients in marijuana – may actually be safe to use with opioids and could be an effective way to lower opioid doses while still providing pain relief. 

“There is intense interest in using medical marijuana in patients with chronic pain because compounds in marijuana like CBD and THC may produce pain relief themselves or enhance the pain-relieving effects of opioids,” said Lawrence Carey, PhD, a postdoctoral fellow at the University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio. “This means people could potentially use lower doses of opioids and still get relief from pain. Taking less pain medication could also lead to a lowered risk of addiction or physical dependence to opioids.”

Carey and his colleagues tested their theory by giving rhesus monkeys dependent on opioids various doses of CBD and THC, either alone or together. The monkeys were then given opportunities to press levers that either gave them a food reward or an injection of fentanyl, a potent synthetic opioid.

Their findings, presented this week at the annual meeting of the American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, showed that CBD and THC did not increase or decrease the number of times the primates selected fentanyl over food. This suggests that cannabis does not enhance the rewarding effects of opioids or raise the risk of addiction, at least for rhesus monkeys.

“Giving the animals the opportunity to choose between a drug injection and a food reward helped us to somewhat replicate choices a human drug user may face, such as whether to spend money on drugs or food,” Carey said in a press release. “Having the option of responding for food is also useful for studying drugs like THC that produce sedative effects. It helps demonstrate the animal is reallocating behavior from drug to food choice instead of simply shutting down response for a drug due to sedation.”

Carey says more studies on humans are needed to determine whether THC and CBD are safe to use with opioids, and if they work well together.

A 2020 study of patients prescribed opioids for chronic low back pain found that half were able to stop using opioids after starting cannabis therapy, but it took an average of six years to do so. About 15% reduced their use of opioids and the remainder either kept taking the same amount or increased their opioid use.

Carey is now conducting animal studies to assess whether CBD and THC can decrease symptoms of opioid withdrawal. 

“A big reason why people continue to take opioids after they become addicted is the appearance of withdrawal symptoms,” said Carey. “We are using what we learned from this study to determine whether these doses — which didn’t alter choice for food or drug rewards — may help relieve opioid withdrawal or decrease relapse and drug seeking behavior following periods of abstinence.”  

9.6 Million Counterfeit Pills Made with Fentanyl Seized in 2021

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

Seven years after the Drug Enforcement Administration issued its first nationwide alert about the emergence of illicit fentanyl in street drugs, the fentanyl crisis continues to escalate and overdose deaths keep rising.

A new study by the National Institute of Drug Abuse (NIDA) estimates that 2,416 kilograms (5,326 pounds) of illicit fentanyl powder were seized by U.S. law enforcement agencies in the last three months of 2021. According to a DEA estimate of fentanyl’s lethality, that’s enough to kill 1.2 billion people.  

That’s not the worst part, according to researchers. The number of counterfeit pills made with fentanyl is also growing and now make up about 29% of all seizures. Over 9.6 million counterfeit pills were seized by law enforcement last year.

“An increase in illicit pills containing fentanyl points to a new and increasingly dangerous period in the United States,” NIDA Director Nora Volkow, MD, said in a statement. “Pills are often taken or snorted by people who are more naïve to drug use, and who have lower tolerances. When a pill is contaminated with fentanyl, as is now often the case, poisoning can easily occur.”

In the last quarter of 2021, over two million counterfeit pills laced with fentanyl were seized – a 4,850% increase from the same period in 2018.

Counterfeit pills are particularly worrisome because they are easy to manufacture, transport and sell -- and most people who buy them have no idea if they’re getting a potentially lethal dose of fentanyl. Counterfeit pills known on the street as “Mexican Oxy” or “M30” look nearly identical to 30mg oxycodone pills.

Because fentanyl is up to 100 times more potent than morphine and 50 times more potent than heroin, it doesn’t take much to kill someone. The DEA estimates that nearly half of counterfeit pills contain at least 2mg of illicit fentanyl, a potentially lethal dose.

“What is particularly concerning is that fentanyl is now often pressed into counterfeit pills which resemble oxycodone (e.g., blue “M30″ pills), hydrocodone, or benzodiazepines such as alprazolam. This is alarming because a large portion of people who misuse psychoactive prescription pills such as opioids or benzodiazepines obtain them from nonmedical sources, thus increasing the likelihood of users unintentionally ingesting fentanyl through counterfeit pills,” lead author Joseph Palamar, PhD, a drug epidemiologist at NYU’s Grossman School of Medicine, reported in the journal Drug and Alcohol Dependence.

Illicit fentanyl was first detected in cocaine, heroin and other U.S. street drugs in 2014. Two years later, counterfeit pills made with fentanyl also began appearing, around the same time the CDC released a guideline that discourages doctors from prescribing opioids for chronic pain.

Faced with pressure from Congress to crackdown on painkillers, the DEA began reducing the legal supply of opioids in 2017. The agency has reduced opioid production quotas for five consecutive years, cutting the supply of hydrocodone and oxycodone in half.

In 2021, the DEA quietly acknowledged that drug cartels were actively targeting pain sufferers as potential customers.  A DEA report said nearly two-thirds of people who misused pain medication “identified relieving pain as the main purpose” of their drug use.

Cutting back on legal opioid medication has clearly backfired. The CDC recently reported that over 105,000 Americans died of drug overdoses in the 12-month period ending October 2021, a record number. About two-thirds of those deaths involved synthetic opioids such as fentanyl.

The risks of fentanyl and counterfeit pills should be well-known by now, but Palamar and his colleagues say a surprising number of people are oblivious to the danger. They cited a recent study of nightclub attendees – a group at high risk of illicit substance use – which found that only half were aware that pills obtained from family, friends or dealers may be counterfeit versions made with fentanyl.

“Public education about the risk of non-pharmacy-sourced pills containing fentanyl needs to be more widespread,” they wrote. “These findings suggest that a substantial portion of people who use illegal drugs appear to be aware that non-pharmacy-sourced pills can contain fentanyl, but less experienced people who may be at risk for use require more education.”

Should the CDC guideline be changed to make it easier for doctors to prescribe opioids? Let us know what you think by taking PNN’s survey on the revised CDC guideline. Click here to get started.

U.S. Falls to 8th Globally in Per Capita Opioid Sales

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

Concerns about opioid addiction and overdoses have caused opioid sales to plummet in the United States in recent years. Opioid consumption has fallen so sharply that Canada, Australia and several European countries have overtaken the U.S. and become the highest consumers of opioid analgesics, according to a new study.

But in many poor and middle-income countries, access to opioids remains very limited, causing unnecessary pain and suffering for millions of sick and dying people.

“There are still concerningly low rates of opioid use in large parts of the world, even in numerous middle-income countries,” said lead author Wallis Lau, PhD, a Lecturer at the School of Pharmacy, University College London.

“Opioids have been listed by the World Health Organization as an essential class of medicine for acute pain, cancer-related pain, and palliative care since 1977, so it is troubling that in many parts of the world, people are unable to access this medicine. There is an urgent need to tackle the global gap in opioid access.”

Lau and her colleagues analyzed global pharmaceutical sales in 66 countries from 2015 to 2019. They found that opioid use in some African and South American countries was less than one tenth of 1% of the rates in wealthier countries in North America, Europe and Australia, according to findings published in The Lancet Public Health.

The highest opioid rate was found in Canada, estimated at 988 milligram morphine equivalents (MME) per day for every 1,000 people. That was down from an average of 1,581 MME per day in Canada in 2015.

By comparison, the U.S. rate was 738 MME per 1,000/day, a 45% decline since 2015. Long touted as having the highest per capita opioid consumption in the world, the U.S. now ranks 8th globally in opioid sales.

At the other end of the scale, a group of 12 West African countries reported only 0.01 MME per 1,000/day. A few other countries, including three in South America, reported rates below 1 MME per 1,000/day.

Opioid Sales Per Capita (2019)

SOURCE: THE LANCET

Researchers say the disparities in opioid consumption go beyond factors such as a nation’s wealth, healthcare quality and disease prevalence. For example, wealthy countries such as the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia reported very low rates of opioid use. Kazakhstan also reported low rates of opioid consumption, despite having high cancer prevalence and high cancer death rates.

“Some countries have low opioid analgesic consumption despite a high cancer prevalence, which could suggest inadequate access to opioid analgesics as much-needed pain control,” said Lau.

Overall, global opioid sales increased by 4% annually from 2015 to 2019. Opioid consumption rates increased in most areas that reported low use, including Eastern Europe, Asia, and South America, but not in Africa.

“These findings reinforce the need to recognise palliative care and pain relief as a global public health priority. In countries that already have good access to opioid analgesics, it is important to avoid opioid misuse and overprescribing, without leaving patients undertreated.” said co-senior author Professor Ian Wong of UCL School of Pharmacy and University of Hong Kong.

According to a 2017 international study commissioned by The Lancet, over 25 million people die annually in severe pain because they have little or no access to morphine and other painkillers. Another 35 million people live with chronic pain that is untreated. The Lancet commission said there were several barriers that stood in the way of effectively treating pain, including “opiophobia” – prejudice and misinformation about the medical value of opioids.

“Unbalanced laws and excessive regulation perpetuate a negative feedback loop of poor access that mainly affects poor people,” the commission said.

CDC Censoring Public Comments About Revised Opioid Guideline

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has censored over a dozen public comments about its revised opioid guideline to remove negative references to Dr. Roger Chou, one of the guideline’s co-authors.  

Chou is a controversial figure in the pain community. A prolific researcher and an outspoken critic of opioid prescribing, Chou heads the Pacific Northwest Evidence-based Practice Center (EPC) at Oregon Health & Science University.

Over the last five years, the university has received nearly $2 billion in contracts from the CDC and other federal agencies, much of it going to the EPC to support Chou’s research. That research, which generally discourages the use of opioids, is cited over 100 times in the revised CDC guideline.

The CDC published the revised draft in the Federal Register last month and invited the public to submit comments, with the agency cautioning posters that it “may choose to redact, or withhold, submissions containing private or proprietary information.”

Of the 2,600 submissions received so far, over 280 have been edited in some way, mostly to remove personal information about the poster or their medical provider

SOURCE: REGULATIONS.GOV

But at least 15 comments critical of Chou’s research and his role in writing the opioid guideline have also been edited to remove his name, even though much of the information they contain is already public and not proprietary.

Chou’s name is redacted four times from this post by Emma W:

“I think it’s reasonable for them to redact private information, physicians’ names, clinic names, etc. I’m all for protecting privacy. But it makes no sense to me that they would redact the names of guideline authors and/or the authors of research papers they directly cite as evidence,” said Emma, who asked that we not use her last name. “I did not personally make any offensive, rude, or vulgar remarks about him in my comment, so I’m still at a loss as to why I and some others were singled out.”

In addition to being a co-author of the revised guideline, Chou was one of the authors of the original 2016 guideline, which led to significant cutbacks in opioid prescribing nationwide. He also continues to serve on the CDC’s Board of Scientific Counselors, despite admitting to a financial conflict-of-interest (COI) at a board meeting last year.

“Since CDC funds Chou’s research, which supports their guidelines, my guess is that they’re going above and beyond to protect him from criticism,” Emma told PNN. “I suppose I should’ve expected this, considering absolutely nothing has been done about his continuing involvement in these guidelines despite his COIs.”

“It is outrageous but I’m not surprised,” said Julie Killingworth, whose comment was edited 6 times to remove the names of Chou and others.

“I thought my comment would be removed because I stopped appeasing the CDC with politeness long ago. I’m not surprised the CDC is silencing people they have cruelly targeted to be tortured,” Killingworth told PNN. “The CDC does not deserve the national respect they feel entitled to receive.” 

To be clear, not every post that references Chou has been edited. PNN identified 5 posts where his name has not been redacted. Those comments are also critical of Chou’s extensive involvement researching, developing and writing the guideline.

“I am concerned about the legality of redacting public comments. This in my experience is quite irregular,” says Terri Lewis, PhD, who co-authored a 2021 paper that looked into Chou’s conflicts of interest. “It doesn't change what are legitimate concerns about what are very real conflicts of interest and the failure to disclose same, especially in light of other historical facts that are emerging.”

In addition to the Chou redactions, the CDC has censored several comments that mention Dr. Andrew Kolodny by name and other members of Physicians for Responsible Opioid Prescribing (PROP), an anti-opioid activist group that Kolodny founded.

Chou has collaborated on several occasions with PROP, including a 2019 op/ed he co-authored with PROP President Dr. Jane Ballantyne and PROP board member Dr. Anna Lembke that encourages doctors to consider tapering “every patient receiving long term opioid therapy.”

(3/31/22 Update: Nearly three weeks after we asked CDC why the names of Chou and others are being redacted, we received this reply from a spokesperson:

“Our approach with comments on this FRN (Federal Register Notice) was to redact all individuals’ names to protect privacy. With so many comments, there have been a few that were not redacted in line with this approach, but the intent was to redact names of any and all individuals.”

The spokesperson said the CDC may also “redact or withhold certain submissions” that contain private or proprietary information, inappropriate language, or duplicated public comments that could indicate a mass-mail campaign.)

The CDC will continue to accept public comments about the revised guideline until April 11. Click here to make one.

Ironically, the revised guideline has generally been received favorably by the pain community because it gives doctors more flexibility in prescribing opioids. Some patients and advocates are leery, however, that the revisions won’t restore access to opioid medication or fix all the other problems the original guideline created, such as patients being forcibly tapered or reduced to ineffective doses.

State Laws Had Little Impact on Opioid Prescribing

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

When the CDC’s opioid prescribing guideline was released in 2016, dozens of states began efforts to codify the guideline’s “voluntary” recommendations into laws and regulations. To date, according to The Pew Charitable Trust, 40 states limit the dose or initial supply of opioid medication, and all 50 states have implemented prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) to track opioid prescriptions and the doctors who write them.

On the surface, it may appear the state policies are working, because opioid prescribing in the U.S. has plunged over 40 percent, to levels not seen in 20 years. But a large new study found that state laws regulating opioids have had very little effect on prescribing – suggesting that other factors may be at work making doctors reluctant to prescribe opioids.

Researchers at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health studied commercial insurance claims for nearly 7.7 million adults in 13 “treatment states” that limited prescribing, established PDMPs or targeted pill mills. The analysis included data for nearly 2 million patients diagnosed with arthritis, low back pain, headache, fiibromyalgia or neuropathic pain.

The study findings, published in Annals of Internal Medicine, show that prescribing and PDMP laws in treatment states were associated with an average change of less than 1% in the proportion of patients receiving an opioid prescription.

For example, in Idaho an estimated 9.18% of pain patients received an opioid prescription prior to the state passing a mandatory PDMP law that required doctors to look up a patient’s prescription drug history. In the first two years of the law’s implementation, that percentage fell only slightly to 9.03% of patients.

State laws have also had a negligible impact on dose and supply. Patients who received an opioid prescription in treatment states had an average change of less than one day in the supply of opioids and an average dosage change of less than 4 morphine milligram equivalents (MME) per day.

“We did not find an association between state opioid prescribing laws and receipt of opioid prescriptions or guideline-concordant nonopioid pain treatments among commercially insured adults. Across the 13 states that implemented laws, the change in treatment attributable to the law was consistently small in magnitude and not
statistically significant,” researchers reported.

“The findings suggest that the decreasing volume of opioid prescribing in the United States may be driven more by shifting clinical guidelines, professional norms, or other factors than by these laws.”

PNN asked lead author Beth McGinty, PhD, if the “other factors” that caused opioid prescribing to decline were the CDC guideline itself or the chilling effect many doctors felt from expanded investigations by state medical boards, law enforcement and the Drug Enforcement Administration.

“Our study was not designed to identify those other factors, so I can’t say for sure what has driven these declines.  Overall declines could be due to changing clinical practices nationwide in response to the CDC guidelines or many others,” McGinty replied in an email.

“Declines could also be driven by a range of other efforts to curb opioid prescribing, perhaps the DEA investigations you mention but also other efforts like health system interventions to reduce prescribing. As I said above, our study was designed to evaluate just the state laws, not these other factors, so I can’t say for sure."

“It's really hard to tell exactly what the findings here mean, despite a valiant effort on the part of the researchers,” says Bob Twillman, PhD, former Executive Director of the Academy of Integrative Pain Management.

Twillman says the CDC guideline was “weaponized” in so many ways by regulators, insurers and states that it’s difficult to measure the impact of any single policy or regulation. It was the cumulative impact of them all that drove down opioid prescribing.

“In truth, the most that you can conclude from this study is that these laws did not appear to reduce prescribing. Unfortunately, in the context of an avalanche of other policies, that conclusion doesn't paint a very accurate picture of what is happening to patients because of all the policies,” Twillman told PNN.

State Laws Failed to Reduce Overdoses

McGinty’s study is not the first to find that PDMPs have been largely ineffective – and may even be making the opioid crisis worse. A 2021 study by the Reason Foundation found that overdoses from illicit fentanyl and heroin increased in states after PDMP’s were adopted. A 2018 study by researchers at Columbia University and University of California, Davis had similar findings. 

State laws that limit the dose and quantity of prescription opioids have also failed to stop overdoses from increasing.

In 2016, Massachusetts became the first state in the nation to limit the initial supply of opioid prescriptions to 7 days. The law has had little impact on overdoses. Over 2,000 people still die annually from opioid overdoses in Massachusetts, a rate that has remained steady. The most recent data shows that illicit fentanyl was involved in 92 percent of overdose deaths in the state.

It was the 2016 CDC guideline that encouraged Massachusetts and many other states to adopt limits on initial opioid prescriptions. For short-term acute pain, the guideline said that opioids for “three days or less will often be sufficient; more than seven days will rarely be needed.”

A newly revised draft guideline drops any reference to the number of days and gives physicians more latitude, recommending that opioids be prescribed for acute pain “for no longer than the expected duration of pain severe enough to require opioids.”

More Than Just CDC Opioid Guideline Needs Changing

By Roger Chriss, PNN Columnist

The CDC’s draft revisions to its 2016 opioid guideline are generally seen as an improvement by pain management experts because they give doctors more flexibility to prescribe opioids. But how much will prescribing really change?

Forty states have enacted laws that limit the supply or dose of opioid prescriptions, according to the Pew Charitable Trust. Some states may resist making changes.

“For the eased guidelines to have their intended effect, states would need to amend or repeal existing statutes that limit opioid prescriptions to three to seven days and set ceilings on the daily dose doctors can prescribe,” Stateline reported.

The reasons are simple. Amid a deteriorating drug overdose crisis and a complex prescribing landscape, the proposed changes in the CDC guideline are likely to be seen at the state level as a negative for public health. There’s a tangled mess of different opioid regulations that vary from state to state.

“Relaxing those regulations now would wreak havoc on states. They won’t know what to do,” says Gary Franklin, MD, who is Vice-President of State Regulatory Affairs for Physicians for Responsible Opioid Prescribing (PROP), an anti-opioid activist group.

“We’ve made quite a dent in prescription painkiller use,” Franklin told EMS1. “But we’ve still got a lot of work to do.”

Lewis Nelson, MD, Chair of Emergency Medicine at Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, is concerned about plans to drop the guideline’s recommended dose limit of 90 morphine milligram equivalents (MME) per day. Nelson says the CDC’s “watered down recommendations” will lead to more addiction and overdoses.

“By removing this recommended cap … prescribers may feel it is appropriate to prescribe longer initial prescriptions to their patients,” Nelson told The Daily Targum, a student newspaper at Rutgers. “This is one of the key factors that created the opioid crisis in the early 1990s that lasted through today.”  

Nelson and Franklin were both key advisors to the CDC during the drafting of its 2016 guideline, serving on a panel known as the “Core Expert Group.” They did not have a similar role in the drafting of the revised guideline.

Federal Agencies and States Do Their Own Thing

Because they are controlled substances, prescription opioids are not regulated the same way as other medications. Manufacturing levels are determined by the DEA, which annually determines production quotas for opioids based on input from the FDA, CDC, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), and individual states. The DEA has been steadily reducing production quotas for prescription opioids for almost a decade and seems unlikely to change course anytime soon.

Drug approval falls to the FDA, which says one of its “highest priorities” is reducing the number of Americans addicted to opioids. “This may be achieved by ensuring that only appropriately indicated patients are prescribed opioids and that the prescriptions are for durations and doses that properly match the clinical reason for which the drug is being prescribed in the first place,” the FDA says on its website.

Federal programs like Medicare, Medicaid and VA/Tricare, as well as private insurers and pharmacies, exert considerable influence on clinical practice via formularies, guidelines, and prior authorizations.

States ignore the CDC, FDA and other federal regulations when it suits their ends, as seen with Florida’s new “Buck the CDC” effort against federal mask mandates and covid guidelines.

States also set their own regulations for legalizing cannabis or decriminalizing hallucinogens.

When it comes to healthcare and public health, each state does its own thing, even if they conflict with federal policy and are detrimental to other states.

Patient advocate Richard “Red” Lawhern deftly summarizes the many nuances of the CDC’s draft guidance with “the devil is in the details.”  And the National Pain Advocacy Center has a detailed analysis of the draft, with suggestions for further advocacy.

The CDC has been a convenient scapegoat for the rapid opioid tapering, patient abandonment, and even suicides that have occurred in recent years. But the reality of regulating prescription opioids and treating chronic pain is complex. Even if CDC does finalize the proposed changes in its draft guideline, there is still a long way to go to restore some semblance of order and stability in pain management.

The CDC is one part of a much larger system that probably needs to change as much as the 2016 guideline need to be updated.

Roger Chriss lives with Ehlers Danlos syndrome and is a proud member of the Ehlers-Danlos Society. Roger is a technical consultant in Washington state, where he specializes in mathematics and research. 

Medical Societies Have New Advice for Treating Surgery Pain in Patients Taking Opioids

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

The American Medical Association and 14 other medical societies have released new advice for physicians managing surgical pain in “complex patients” who have chronic pain, substance use disorders, or those taking opioid medication prior to surgery.

The seven guiding principles emphasize the coordination of pain care with other providers, and that patients taking opioids be allowed to stay on them before, during and after surgery.  

“Every surgical patient deserves adequate pain relief that aims to prevent opioid reliance, chronic pain and other negative outcomes, but it may be more challenging to achieve this in certain patient populations,” Randall Clark, MD, President of the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA), said in a statement.

“The new principles were created to build upon an original set established last year during our first pain summit, but specifically address patients undergoing surgery with chronic pain, those taking opioids preoperatively, and those with substance use disorders.  The new principles give the perioperative care team more guidance to care for these particularly complex patients.”

The new principles come at a time when many U.S. hospitals are reducing the use of opioids for surgical pain. As result, some people in pain have postponed or cancelled surgeries because they fear their postoperative pain would be poorly treated or their current opioid therapy would be disrupted.

For patients on long-term opioid therapy, the principles urge physicians to “continue the baseline opioid dose” and to provide “supplemental analgesia” for postoperative pain. The additional pain treatment should be the coordinated with the patient’s opioid-prescribing clinician, with the goal of returning to “the preoperative dose or lower as soon as possible.”

“This really is meant to be a patient-centered document that says we should invest in making sure these patients have a good experience,” said David Dickerson, MD, chair of the ASA’s Committee on Pain Medicine. “A lot of people don’t even get their baseline meds continued during their surgery. They don’t even get their home meds. And so this now creates a principle that says you need to have a really good reason why you’re going to withhold those meds.

“In our health system, if someone has pre-op opioid use, we know that they’re going to need more opioids in the wake of their surgery or they’re going to need more anesthetic even while they’re on the table having their care,” said Dickerson, an anesthesiologist who is section chief for pain medicine at the NorthShore University HealthSystem in Chicago.

In addition to the ASA and AMA, these medical organizations have adopted the new guiding principles:

• American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons

• American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery

• American Association of Neurological Surgeons

• American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons

• American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists

• American College of Surgeons

• American Hospital Association

• American Society of Addiction Medicine

• American Society of Breast Surgeons

• American Society of Plastic Surgeons

• American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine

• American Urological Association

• Society of Thoracic Surgeons

‘CDC Guideline Falls Flat’

Dickerson emphasized the new guiding principles are only meant as a resource for physicians managing surgical pain and are not intended to be a guideline or standard of care. He also expressed concern about some of the proposed changes to the CDC’s opioid prescribing guideline, which now includes recommendations for treating postoperative pain.

“I think that the CDC guidelines, as they are proposed in their draft format right now, is not an incredibly functional document. It doesn’t really shape what great pain care looks like. All it talks about really is mitigating the effects of opioid injury. It offers up ideas, but I don’t think it’s a comprehensive summary of what we do for patients,” Dickerson told PNN.

The CDC’s draft revision is actually quite similar to the medical societies’ new principles for treating surgery pain. It allows for patients on long-term opioid therapy to get additional opioids “for the duration” of their postoperative pain, with a return to their baseline doses as soon as possible.  

But Dickerson says there are many different types of surgery that require different forms of pain control, and some complicated patients may need more pain relief and different therapies than others. He thinks medical societies should set their own guidelines for their own specialties, and not rely on the generic advice of the CDC.

“I think that societies when they come together to do things like this are really best-tasked as experts to do this. To expect primary care physicians to write a guideline about how to manage surgical populations is limited from the start,” he said. “I think the CDC guideline falls flat.”

The Devil in the Details of Revised CDC Opioid Guideline

By Richard Lawhern, PNN Contributor

Last month, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention circulated a revised and greatly expanded draft update to its 2016 guideline on prescribing opioids to adults with chronic non-cancer pain. The new version expands to include short-term acute and “subacute” pain, and it acknowledges some of the harms done by the “misapplication” of its predecessor. 

The draft also proclaims that clinicians and their patients should be free to tailor pain therapy to the needs and circumstances of each individual, rather than applying the guidelines as a mandatory or legal standard of care. 

Many media commentators have focused on the easing of restrictions on opioid pain therapy. But as often happens, the devil is in the details -- which many commentators have either not read or paid appropriate attention to. In my view, the revised draft is simply version 2.0 of the same “Little Shop of Horrors: published in 2016. 

The authors of the revised guideline set out to deceive the public with the appearance of giving doctors more discretion in prescribing opioids. But that new “flexibility” is overwhelmed by wording that subtly informs doctors that they may risk sanctions if they prescribe opioids to anyone, at any level above 50 morphine milligram equivalents (MME) dose per day.

The underlying bias and predetermined agenda of the CDC writers is apparent in the wording of the draft:

• The words “risk” or “risks” appear 512 times, while “benefits” appears 167 times. Clinicians are repeatedly admonished to evaluate “risks versus benefits” of opioid therapy when deciding to prescribe opioids or increase the dose. But the draft acknowledges that “there is no validated, reliable way to predict which patients will suffer serious harm from opioid therapy and no reliable way to predict which patients will benefit from opioid therapy.”  In more accurate words, clinicians are on their own when they prescribe these medications.

• “Taper” or “tapering” or “tapers” are mentioned 200 times. Although “abrupt discontinuation” of opioids is discouraged, clinicians are still advised to “appropriately taper and discontinue opioids” for patients on high doses.

• The writers repeat their false claim from 2016, that opioids are not a proven long-term therapy because there are few long-term randomized double-blind trials for opioids versus placebo. They ignore the fact that the rarity of long-term trials reflects high dropout rates among patients who experience breakthrough pain when treated with placebos.  This error can be corrected by the use of enriched enrollment trials, which is unmentioned in the draft.

• The writers also assert that “additional dosage increases beyond 50 MME/day are progressively more likely to yield diminishing returns in benefits relative to risks to patients.” However, they offer scant scientific evidence for this assertion. They fail to reference case reports from patients who do well on high doses exceeding 1000 MME.

• Most fundamentally, the entire CDC draft is organized around the concept of “Morphine Milligram Equivalent Dose” – which is now known to be junk science unsupported by any real data.

Errors and distortions of the CDC draft are also apparent in the wording of their 12 recommendations:

• Seven of the recommendations are identified as “Category A recommendations [which] indicate that most patients should receive the recommended course of action.” Any reasonable clinician will recognize these words as a standard of practice that they violate at their own peril. 

• The 2nd recommendation is that “nonopioid therapies are preferred for subacute and chronic pain.”
  Ignored in this phrasing is the fact that several of the CDC referenced studies on non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) employed deeply flawed protocols. Likewise, there have been no trials of non-drug therapies as substitutions for opioids in moderate to severe pain. Thus, non-opioid therapies cannot possibly be “preferred.”

• Also glossed over by the draft writers is the strength of evidence supporting seven of the recommendations is rated as “type 4 evidence” (clinical experience and observations, observational studies with important limitations, or randomized clinical trials with several major limitations). Freely translated, this level of evidence simply represents the opinions of the writers, rather than any general consensus among actual practitioners. 

The revised guideline is almost as interesting for what it does not discuss as for what it does. Missing from the draft is any mention of the World Health Organization’s “Pain Ladder.” First published in 1986 and oriented to cancer pain, it is now widely used in both doctor training and common practice for all types of pain.

• The first level of the ladder is Tylenol (ibuprofen) and other NSAIDs -- which are used in the short term for mild to moderate pain.

• Second level of the ladder is weak opioids like tramadol, used in longer lasting or more intense moderate to severe pain.

• Third level is strong opioids like hydromorphone or medical fentanyl, used in very severe or treatment-resistant pain.

• Non-drug treatments like acupuncture or massage can be integrated with pain therapy at any level of the ladder, to assist patients in managing pain and increasing function. These are not, however, replacements for drug treatment.

• Interventional treatments like nerve blocks, epidural corticosteroid injections, spinal cord stimulators or fusion surgery may be used when pain is resistant to drug therapy. 

The rationale for excluding discussion of this framework from the CDC guideline is nowhere made clear in either the 2016 or 2022 documents.  The implied reason for this policy choice seems to be that prescription opioid analgesics were assumed by the writers to carry significant danger of addiction and misuse, even when administered at low doses and for short periods. 

It is now clear, however, that such reasoning is seriously wrong on facts. Prescription opioids did not cause and are not sustaining America’s so-called “opioid crisis.”  That distinction belongs to illegal street drugs, notably illegal fentanyl.

Given the many failings of the Little Shop of Horrors 2.0, it is reasonable to ask, “What should be next?”  In my opinion, it is time to burn this shop to the ground and start all over.

The development of practice standards for pain treatment should be taken entirely out of the CDC and allocated to medical specialty boards and academies whose members are practicing clinicians -- rather than public health bureaucrats who have never treated patients face-to-face.

Richard “Red” Lawhern, PhD, has for over 25 years volunteered as a patient advocate in online pain communities and a subject matter expert on public policy for medical opioids. Dr. Lawhern has written or co-authored over 150 papers and articles published in medical journals and mass media.