CDC opioid guideline is causing harm to people in chronic pain

http://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/402083-cdc-opioid-guideline-is-causing-harm-to-people-in-chronic-pain

On March 15, 2016, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) published its Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain. The recommendations were designed for primary care clinicians who are prescribing opioids for chronic noncancer pain. Its purpose was to lower the supply of prescription drugs and decrease the number of opioid overdoses.

Pain advocacy groups were concerned that the CDC Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain could have unintended negative consequences when they were introduced. For example, the Cancer Action Network‘s president, Chris Hansen, published a statement called “Final CDC Opioid Prescribing Guideline Could Have Unintended Consequences for Cancer Survivors Living with Chronic Pain.” It read, in part, “We are disappointed that the CDC guideline released today did not address our previously stated concern about needed access to opioid analgesics for cancer survivors who experience severe pain that limits their quality of life.”

The CDC positioned the guideline as voluntary. But, five months after the guideline was published, the CDC was cautioned by a public relations firm they hired, “Some doctors are following these guidelines as strict law rather than recommendation, and these physicians have completely stopped prescribing opioids.” The CDC ignored the warning.

Even worse, last month, the Oregon Health Authority proposed denying access to opioids for most people with chronic non-cancer pain. The Oregon Health Authority has lost sight of the fact that the amount of opioids prescribed is only one factor — and may not be the primary factor — contributing to the opioid crisis. Lack of access to adequate mental health and addiction treatment has also contributed to the problem.

Oregon is not the only state that is limiting access to opioids. Michigan, Florida, and Tennessee are among other states that have also passed laws restricting physicians’ ability to prescribe opioids. Utah-based Intermountain Healthcare has implemented forced tapering to achieve their goals of lowering prescriptions by 40 percent in 2018. In other states, health-care plans and insurers, such as Cigna and Aetna, have similar goals.

The assumption that denying prescription opioids to those in severe pain regardless of the diagnosis will stop abuse is foolhardy and harmful. As states and insurance companies begin to implement similar restrictive prescribing policies for the treatment of chronic pain, we will see at least two negative effects:

First, people with a substance abuse disorder (SUD) who are using prescribed opioids for the wrong reasons are not going to suddenly stop using drugs because they aren’t readily available. Instead, they will seek other sources of drugs. They will turn to the streets for their opioid replacements. This may contribute to more deaths, because the streets are where the most dangerous drugs are found.

 

This is illustrated by what occurred when the abuse-deterrent OxyContin was introduced. Abusers began substituting heroin when OxyContin became more difficult to obtain and abuse. The National Bureau of Economic Research’s published 2017 report, “Supply-side Drug Policy in the Presence of Substitutes: Evidence from the Introduction of Abuse-Deterrent Opioids,” explains how supply-side strategies alone are inadequate for dealing with drug abuse.

Second, people in pain who have been functioning on their medication without signs of abuse may be at an increased risk for suicide. Without adequate pain treatment, they may lose significant quality of life. In some instances, people will feel abandoned and hopeless.

It is not an exaggeration to suggest that some people in severe pain who are denied access to opioids will view suicide as the only way to escape their severe pain. Inadequately treated pain is a risk factor for overdoses and suicides. Recent research suggests as many as 30 percent of unintentional opioid-related overdose deaths may be suicides.

Certainly, opioid abuse is a significant problem and must be addressed. But policies to force opioid tapering as a way to mitigate the opioid crisis are ill-conceived. To set arbitrary dose limits without consideration of patients’ needs is malevolent.

The CDC needs to respond to the unintended harm the guideline has created. They should follow the lead of Canadian physicians. The College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia (CPSBC) revised the guidelines that they adopted from the CDC following consultation with physicians in the Province and patients who were being denied care, abandoned, or forced to decrease doses to 90 mg morphine milligram equivalents (MME) or less suggested by the CDC guideline.

By contrast with the CDC, the CPSBC recognized the harm that the guidelines were producing for some patients, and they had the courage and leadership to clarify their previous recommendations. They announced, “Physicians cannot exclude or dismiss patients from their practice because they have used or are currently using opioids. It’s really a violation of the human rights code and it’s certainly discrimination and that’s not acceptable or ethical practice.”

The nonprofit New York-based Human Rights Watch (HRW) organization that typically tracks and exposes war crimes apparently agrees with the CPSBC, because they recently expressed concern about the CDC guidelines’ potential consequences for pain patients. HRW is investigating whether people’s right to receive appropriate health care when they are in pain has been violated if they have been forced to reduce their medication. They expect to produce a report later this year.

It is important to find answers to the drug crisis, but the solutions must not create more harm than benefit to both people in pain and people with addictions. The current implementation of the CDC’s Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for chronic pain does not achieve this end and is not patient-centered. Hopefully, the CDC will assume the responsibility to clearly state their guideline is not being implemented as they intended.

The CDC should issue a public statement similar to the one published by the CPSBC clarifying that physicians should not dismiss patients or deny them access to pain care because they are on opioids, even if the dose they need is above 90 mg MME. This is not advocating for opioids but, rather, advocating for patients. It respects the human right to receive compassionate care.

Lynn R. Webster, MD is a vice president of scientific affairs for PRA Health Sciences and consults with Pharma. He is a former president of the American Academy of Pain Medicine. Webster is the author of “The Painful Truth: What Chronic Pain Is Really Like and Why It Matters to Each of Us.” You can find him on Twitter: @LynnRWebsterMD. 

Make your voice heard! Last chance to comment on proposed opioid prescribing rules

https://wsma.org/Shared_Content/News/Membership_Memo/20180808/Last_chance_to_comment_on_rules_impacting_the_way_you_prescribe_opioids

Make your voice heard! Last chance to comment on proposed opioid prescribing rules

The WSMA is urging members to review and provide feedback on the Washington State Medical Commission’s final proposed rulemaking establishing opioid prescribing requirements for physicians and physician assistants in our state. Don’t delay; your comments are due by Aug. 16. This is your last opportunity to provide input before the rules are finalized by the Medical Commission later this year.

While the current proposal is drastically improved over previous iterations, the WSMA remains concerned about the volume of administrative burden and liability these rules would place on physicians and physician assistants during the limited context of a patient encounter and the resulting impact on access to appropriate care. Learn more about these concerns by reviewing our formal comments on the rulemaking, submitted on behalf of the WSMA and Washington State Hospital Association joint opioid safe practices task force.

In addition to your own thoughts, your feedback to the Medical Commission may be as simple as endorsing WSMA and WSHA’s comments. Send your feedback on the draft rules to the Medical Commission at medical.rules@doh.wa.gov before Aug. 16.

For those available to attend in person, the Medical Commission will be holding a public hearing on the proposed rule on Aug. 22, beginning at 2 p.m. at the Hotel RL Olympia located at 2300 Evergreen Park Drive SW in Olympia.

Americans Rationing Insulin As Prices Skyrocket | NBC Nightly News

26-year-old Alec Smith couldn’t afford the $1,300 a month insulin he needed to control his diabetes, so he tried rationing it — and died. His mother is now speaking out, telling NBC News she lost her son “because of pharmaceutical greed.”NBC News is a leading source of global news and information. Here you will find clips from NBC Nightly News, Meet The Press, and original digital videos. Subscribe to our channel for news stories, technology, politics, health, entertainment, science, business, and exclusive NBC investigations.

 

“One thing that stood out to me is just how little variation there is … across party lines. Dealing with opiate crisis has support from both parties

https://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/vulnerable-democrats-opioid-epidemic

Vulnerable red-state Democrats are highlighting their work to address the opioid crisis in an effort to hold on to their congressional seats, even as it remains unclear whether the Senate will take key action before the midterm elections.

While the opioid epidemic is a priority for much of Congress, candidates in especially hard-hit states, such as West Virginia, have made it a core issue in their re-election bids.

An ad by the Democratic Senate Majority PAC touts Sen. Joe Manchin III’s efforts in passing legislation as part of the fiscal 2018 omnibus package that would allow doctors to more easily find out if a patient has a history of substance abuse. Manchin, who faces a tough race against Republican Patrick Morrisey, is one of 10 Senate Democrats running in states won by Donald Trump in 2016.

Morrisey, the West Virginia attorney general, has campaigned on his efforts to curb the opioid epidemic, such as suing pharmaceutical distributor McKesson.

Manchin is among the candidates most likely to benefit from making opioids a campaign issue, said Andrew Kessler, founder of Slingshot Solutions, which specializes in behavioral health policy consulting. Both Republican and Democratic members of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee also stand out as leaders in taking on opioids, Kessler said.

The Senate returns from a brief recess this week to a busy fall schedule that includes government funding legislation and a Supreme Court nomination, leaving little wiggle room to pass an opioids package before Nov. 6.

Voting on opioids prior to Election Day would benefit Democrats, said Andrea Harris, senior vice president of the Height Capital Markets health care team. The former Hill staffer and ex-Obama administration appointee noted Republicans may not want to give the opposing party a win before the elections. She added Majority Leader Mitch McConnell may be skeptical about having anything related to health care on the Senate floor that either party could use as a vehicle for other health-related legislation.

Fighting on the airwaves

For Democrats, who are in a position to topple the GOP majority in the House, their campaign messaging is focused on criticizing Republicans for not doing enough to fund opioid-fighting efforts.

“Time and again, Republican lawmakers say they will help those impacted by this crisis, only to turn around and refuse to expand Medicaid or propose cuts to this vital source of treatment funding,” said Sabrina Singh, deputy communications director for the Democratic National Committee.

Republicans, meanwhile, can point to more than 50 bills passed by the House aimed at improving awareness for at-risk patients and increasing access to treatment, said Jesse Hunt, national press secretary for the National Republican Congressional Committee.

During a campaign event last week, Sen. Joe Donnelly of Indiana stated he plans to continue bipartisan work on passing his bill that gives students pursuing fields related to substance use disorders some loan forgiveness if they commit to working in an area with elevated overdose rates for at least six years.

[Number of Pregnant Women Abusing Opioids Skyrockets]

In July, Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri released an ad touting her work in taking on pharmaceutical companies, including those that may have played a role in the opioid crisis. McCaskill also released a report last month that examined opioid distributors and manufacturers in her home state, as well as the volume of opioids shipped into it.

McCaskill’s opponent, Missouri Attorney General Josh Hawley, is also campaigning on what he’s done to investigate opioid manufacturers. His office filed suit against Purdue Pharma, Endo Health Solutions and Janssen Pharmaceuticals last year, arguing that the companies deliberately misrepresented the addictiveness of opioids.

Donnelly and McCaskill are locked in Senate races that are rated as toss-ups by Inside Elections with Nathan L. Gonzales.

In the Wisconsin Senate race, rated by Gonzales as leaning Democratic, incumbent Sen. Tammy Baldwin opened up about her mother’s drug problem in a May ad. The Democrat talks of a bipartisan approach to solve the problem.

[For Some in Congress, the Opioid Crisis Is Personal]

“I have worked with Republicans and Democrats to get the funding Wisconsin needs, so people have somewhere to turn for help,” she said in the ad. “It’s just a start.”

But Kevin Nicholson, a Republican businessman and veteran who is running against Baldwin, wants more.

“Solving the opioid epidemic will take a multi-pronged approach. Wisconsin needs a senator who’s willing to provide solutions that prevent drug dependency from the start,” Nicholson tweeted last month.

What’s next

Republicans may be less likely to lose ground at the polls by not sending opioid legislation to Trump’s desk this fall, strategists say. They can point to a House-passed bill that has been awaiting Senate action since June and could be sent to a conference committee.

“If you’re a House member and you voted for it, you can say you’ve voted for it,” said Christopher Nicholas, a GOP political consultant and president of Eagle Consulting Group. “If you’re a senator who is going to support it and it doesn’t come up, you can still say I support the bill, even though it hasn’t come to a floor vote yet.”

A senator could also put out a memo with other things he or she has done to address the issue even if a vote on opioids legislation doesn’t happen before the elections, Nicholas said.

“It would be hard for your opponent to take a swipe at you,” he said.

[Congress’ Focus on Opioids Misses Larger Crisis]

Former NRCC Chairman Greg Walden of Oregon has spearheaded much of the House effort as the leader of the Energy and Commerce Committee, which has spotlighted many personal stories from members and constituents about the impact of opioids. The party has also launched opioidcrisis.gop to highlight Republican efforts.

The Senate returns Wednesday. A GOP leadership aide has said four committees are working to craft an opioids package that the Senate can vote on, resolve differences with the House and send to Trump. Timing could be key.

“If they wait until late October [for opioids] and then only have part of the lame-duck session to hammer out the conference, that’s not going to help anybody,” said Kessler with Slingshot Solutions.

Little variation by party

Advocacy groups such as the American Action Network demand action.

The center-right group spent more than $5 million earlier this year on ads encouraging the House to pay attention to opioid abuse. It targeted a bipartisan group of more than 25 districts, including those of vulnerable GOP Reps. Leonard Lance of New Jersey, Peter Roskam of Illinois and Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania.

Combating the opioid epidemic is a little like backing education or parks, said Jason Husser, who conducts an associate professor of political science and policy studies at Elon University and a pollster. Essentially, no one opposes it.

“One thing that stood out to me is just how little variation there is … across party lines. Dealing with this issue has support from both parties,” said Husser, who conducted an Elon Poll on attitudes toward the epidemic among likely voters in North Carolina last year.

Call to Action

Call to Action:

PAIN WARRIORS COLLABORATIVE TEAM (QUESTIONNAIRE)

We Welcome ALL Chronic Pain Patients, Advocates, Medical & Legal Professionals, Group Members, and Team Leaders from ALL PAIN GROUPS & ADVOCACY WEBSITES to JOIN FORCES & WORK TOGETHER as a COLLABORATIVE TEAM EFFORT. We’re running out of TIME and must do everything possible to change the current RESTRICTIVE measures being taken against doctors and pain patients across the country. (ALL INFORMATION WILL BE KEPT PRIVATE)

 

Fellow Pain Warriors,

 

As you know,  our lawmakers are in the process of passing several new laws on the State and Federal level to further restrict the prescribing of ALL opioid pain medication which will severely harm legitimate pain patients across the country.

 

With the midterm election around the corner,  many legislators will surely  use the passage of these proposed bills as a political “football” to gain leverage with their constituents.  Meanwhile,  legitimate pain patients lives are hanging in the balance and if we don’t act fast,  we won’t be able to undo or mitigate the damage that’s already been done.

 

There’s no time to waste, so we must rally the troops to fight back against this “WAR” on pain patients and doctors by pulling together to collaborate and work TOGETHER as one giant FORCE to be reckoned with.  This “team effort” is not connected with any specific group or name in the interest of keeping everyone on neutral ground.

 

I’ve prepared a questionnaire (see below) to share with all interested parties in order to gather the information needed to form a collaborative team and assign specific tasks based on each members area of experience/expertise.

 

It would be appreciated if you could complete this form and pass it along to share far and wide with ALL pain groups.

 

https://goo.gl/forms/FgJhfK05OtWm7qgQ2

WAR ON PAIN PATIENTS

War on Pain Page:  https://www.facebook.com/waronpainpatients/

War on Pain Group:  https://www.facebook.com/groups/193354774642975/

Twitter:  https://mobile.twitter.com/NJMETALGIRL

 

stupid is as stupid does ?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hi Steve,

You have been such a help to me. I have an issue of course. As I stated before, I have a perfect cures report etc..I did find a pharmacy to fill my meds but now they won’t fill until 31 days! I am literally running out of medicines. So for example, I am out for 2 days and I pick up on the 2, the HAVE to count that day because I have been out. They are not counting the 31 days in a month. Example, got my meds July 6 they refused to fill until Aug 6. I have a calendar that shows everything. I take 2 oxy a day for 30 days. You can see I ran out. I do not know what to do, if I complain they will just refuse service. If I was a guyI would say they have me by the nuts! Lol.

What the heck do I do. I am a teacher and start school tomorrow. My last fill was July 16and they refuse to fill until aug 16. Any advice? We really have no recourse anymore.

Thank you. I actually have the refill apps. They all say 31 days!These people are Armenian and their English is not really good. I have written everything down in plain English. I totally understand how some count from the day after pick up. day after. I was doing that, and that doesn’t even make sense, but I do it anyways which leads me to my point that now they are filling it late so I go 2 days without so how can they Not count the first day because I have been out of the medication so I have to take the dose the DAY I get the prescription. I am not good at math but I can even figure this out!It makes you want to give up on life. I have done eve7by the book. My dr. Says he is powerless now too. He has called and everything. Steve, I am a teacher and these meds allow me to do my job. I have never ever deviated, asked for early meds etc… please help. I cannot go on with the anxiety this is causing. I live in Burbank, does your friend know of any pharmacy. I go to Glendale. 

Thank you again

The above is from the pharmacy’s computer… the previous Rx was filled on July 16th and indicates that the next due date is Aug 14th… notice that the computer apparently has the ability to be specific of how many days early that the Rx can be filled and it is registering ZERO DAYS EARLY… and the Pharmacist told the pt that she was to wait TWO MORE DAYS… meaning that the pt is INTENTIONALLY going to be thrown into withdrawal. Apparently this Pharmacist’s calendar must have 30 days IN EVERY MONTH…  according to this pt this pharmacist’s ENGLISH is not that good and apparently his MATH is even worse.

 

 

 

Escape from the Mayo Clinic: Teen accuses world-famous hospital of ‘medical kidnapping’

https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/13/health/mayo-clinic-escape-1-eprise/index.html

Parking Shortage at Washington DC VA Medical Center Has Veterans With Disabilities Walking Hundreds of Feet

Parking Shortage at Washington DC VA Medical Center Has Veterans With Disabilities Walking Hundreds of Feet

https://www.nbcwashington.com/investigations/Parking-Shortage-at-Washington-DC-VA-Medical-Center-Has-Veterans-With-Disabilities-Walking-Hundreds-of-Feet-490860451.html

The Washington DC VA Medical Center is apologizing to its patients for a shortage of accessible parking spaces.

An investigation by the News4 I-Team revealed struggles by patients with disabilities to find parking spaces for medical appointments at the giant medical center.

Video and interviews by the I-Team show patients with severe mobility limitations making long, winding walks through car traffic and small hills to get access to the building.

A man with a cane walking through the medical center parking lot.
Photo credit: NBCWashington

The DC VA Medical Center is the flagship facility in the nationwide health system run by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. It has more than 100,000 patients and approximately 2,000 employees, but parking spaces are limited on the congested campus along Irving Street NW.

A parking garage construction project is expected to add 460 new spaces once it’s completed in March.

In the meantime, patients and staffers told the I-Team parking can be scarce and challenging during peak hours at the medical center.

A visitor got creative.
Photo credit: NBCWashington

“Sometimes if I have a noon appointment, I’ll leave home at 8 o’clock in the morning,” said Jonathan Warwick, a U.S. Army veteran from Gaithersburg, Maryland, who is recovering from a fractured spine and two recently replaced hips.

I-Team cameras captured video of Warwick attempting to walk up a small grassy hill to get access to his car in a parking spot nearly 1,000 feet from the medical center entrance.

Jonathan Warwick
Photo credit: NBCWashington

“One time my foot got stuck and I fell walking there,” Warwick said. “I told my doctor about it.”

An internal VA study of accessibility challenges released under the Freedom of Information Act reveals agency officials were aware of the parking challenges in D.C. “Even for the able bodied it is ‘a hike’ from car to front door,” the study says. “A visitor must walk in the drive aisles through parking lots or on grass around parking lots because the only sidewalks are up at the building perimeter. For disabled patients this is an unacceptable deficiency.”

Army veteran Sequoia Pointer of Waldorf, Maryland, said the valet system offered by the medical center requires patients wait 30 to 60 minutes before they deposit their cars. Pointer uses a motorized scooter as he recovers from the effects of a stroke.

“I give myself two hours (to find parking),” he said. “If I start doing the valet, it’ll be two and a half hours.”

A man with a walker navigates the medical center parking lot.
Photo credit: NBCWashington

In response to questions from the I-Team, an agency spokeswoman said, “We fully understand the frustration veterans and visitors are experiencing when parking at the facility. We offer our sincerest apologies for the inconvenience the Patient and Visitor Parking Garage construction project may cause.”

“In a good way, business is booming at the VA,” said Heather Ansley, acting associate director of Paralyzed Veterans of America. “A lot of veterans go get their care. But that poses some logistical challenges.”

“If there are complications anywhere along the spectrum, you may have people say, ‘I’m not getting the health care that I really need,’” Ansley said.

The VA study released to the I-Team shows parking challenges exist at more than a dozen other VA facilities nationwide. The study shows additional handicapped-accessible parking spaces are needed at medical centers in Beckley, West Virginia; Augusta, Georgia; Nashville, Tennessee; and Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Officials with the Veterans of Foreign Wars said the agency should be advocating for better funding from Congress for its maintenance and medical center upgrades.

“There’s a backlog,” VFW Associate Director Patrick Murray said. “They simply can’t perform all these tasks on a yearly basis. It would involve a major effort to do so.”

 

OPIOIDS | THE NEW FACE OF THE CRISIS

https://youtu.be/x0HINsoVWKY

Prior authorization rules: Yet another way the health insurance system frustrates physicians and patients

Prior authorization rules: Yet another way the health insurance system frustrates physicians and patients

www.healthjournalism.org/blog/2018/08/prior-authorization-rules-yet-another-way-the-health-insurance-system-frustrates-physicians-and-patients/

For patients and physicians, many aspects of the health care and health insurance systems are frustrating and appear to be needlessly complex.

One of the most frustrating processes is prior authorization, the mother-may-I approach health insurers use to ensure that procedures, medications and even certain care processes are appropriate and worthy of coverage.

In a new tip sheet, we explain that for health insurers, providers and patients, prior authorization is not only complex but also highly controversial.

The prior-auth process itself goes by several names including preauthorization, prior approval, precertification, prior notification, prospective review and prior review. As might be expected, physicians suspect health insurers use prior approval to restrict coverage to costly and new services and therapies.

In July, members of the U.S. Senate criticized health insurers for the way they manage requests for prior authorization, according to an article, “Senate Panel Eyes Regulating Insurance Prior Authorizations,” by Susannah Luthi who covers health policy and politics in Congress for Modern Healthcare.

“Lawmakers including Sens. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), Bill Cassidy (R-La.) and Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.) noted that insurers’ verification requirements can place undue burden on patients and physicians while also threatening delays in care,” Luthi wrote.

In the same article, Luthi reported that David Cutler, Ph.D., the Otto Eckstein professor of applied economics in the Department of Economics at the Harvard Medical School, recommended that the federal government standardize prior authorization forms for all insurers.

Standardizing these forms might help eliminate some of the disagreements between physicians and insurers over preapprovals that regularly erupt into public view. In June, for example, a teenager in Massachusetts died of a seizure after being unable to get prior authorization to renew a prescription for her medication.

In February, a former medical director for Aetna said in a sworn deposition that he never looked at patients’ medical records before deciding to approve or deny a prior authorization request. After that story broke, six states said they would investigate Aetna’s prior authorization practices.

Physicians say prior authorization is problematic because it can delay treatment and burdens them with hours of paperwork and time on the phone seeking approval from health insurers and their intermediaries.

Early this year, the health insurance industry and other organizations addressed these criticisms by producing a plan to improve prior authorization and increase timely access to treatment. The organizations agreed to a consensus statement that outlined this plan were America’s Health Insurance Plans (the trade association for health insurers), the American Hospital Association, the AMA, the American Pharmacists Association, the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association, and the Medical Group Management Association.

Another way health insurers are responding to critics is by cutting the number of health care professionals subject to prior authorization requirements based on their performance, adherence to evidence-based medical practices or participation in a value-based agreements with health insurers.

Health care journalists have an opportunity to report on whether any of these changes will improve the prior-authorization process. See our new tip sheet to guide your reporting on prior authorization.