Improving opioid guideline adherence: evaluation of a multifaceted, theory-informed pilot intervention for family physicians

Abstract

ObjectivesOpioid-related deaths continue to increase in North America, an epidemic that was initiated by high rates of opioid prescribing. We designed a multifaceted, theory-informed Opioid Self-Assessment (OSA) package, to increase adherence to the Canadian Opioid Guideline among family physicians. This study aimed to assess changes in Canadian family physicians’ knowledge and practices after completing the OSA package.DesignWe conducted a mixed-method evaluation using a pre-test and post-test design that involved the collection of both qualitative and quantitative data.SettingThis research was conducted in the primary care setting in Ontario, Canada.ParticipantsWe recruited a purposive sample of nine family physicians in Ontario who use long-term opioid therapy to treat patients with chronic pain.InterventionsThe OSA package included four components: an online knowledge test, an online learning programme, a safe medication practice self-assessment questionnaire and chart audit with feedback.Outcome measuresOur measures included changes in knowledge, opioid safety practices and physicians’ perspectives on the OSA package.ResultsWe found statistically significant improvements between pre-test and post-test knowledge scores at both baseline and 6-month follow-up. Physicians’ scores improved significantly on five of the seven core characteristics of the practice self-assessment questionnaire. On the chart audits, we observed an improvement in patient education between baseline and 6 months. Qualitative interviews showed that participants appreciated embedded resources in the OSA package. The completion of the package stimulated identification of gaps or deficits in practice and served as a useful reminder to discuss risk and safety with patients. Participants described the chart review as helpful in prompting discussions with their patients, identifying deficits and strengths and a ‘primary motivator’ for project participation.ConclusionsThe OSA package has the potential to improve medication safety practices in primary care related to opioid monitoring and adherence to current opioid guidelines.

Professionals’, patients’ and families’ views on the use of opioids for chronic breathlessness: A systematic review using the framework method and pillar process

“…Early work in chronic non-cancer pain opioid management supports the use of a theory driven opioid self-assessment education package to improve knowledge, opioid safety practices and physician perceptions in primary care prescribers. 51 The barriers and enablers outlined in this review provide insights into factors affecting clinician willingness to prescribe opioids, treatment formulation and patient and family adherence to prescribed treatment.…”

Fatal overdoses after release from prison in British Columbia: a retrospective data linkage study

“…There is a high prevalence of noncancer chronic pain among both people in prison 21 and those receiving opioid agonist treatment; 22 opioid analgesics may be an appropriate treatment for these people. However, given our unsurprising finding that dispensing of opioids for pain was independently associated with a more than fourfold increase in risk of overdose-related death after release from prison, it appears that efforts to improve chronic pain management, 23 and to enhance harm reduction measures, are warranted to ensure that medications intended to treat chronic pain do not result in preventable deaths in this medically complex population. We found that co-occurring physical and mental health comorbidities increased the risk of both overdose-related and all-cause death.…”

Intervention targeted at physicians’ treatment of musculoskeletal disorders and sickness certification: an interrupted time series analysis

“…Findings show that success in changing the behaviour and adherence to different clinical guidelines vary. Some studies reported success in behaviour change,25 26 whereas other studies reported limited success or found the interventions ineffective 27–29. Moreover, a change in physicians’ behaviour does not automatically reflect in patient outcomes 28.…”