Enhancing Patient Safety in Opioid Prescribing: A Systematic Review of Potential Indicators
Bansal, N.; Khawagi, W. Y.; Shang, N.; Chen, L.-C.
Show abstract
BackgroundThis systematic review aimed to identify a comprehensive list of prescribing safety indicators for opioids in any setting from published literature. MethodsLiterature that reported prescribing indicators from 1990-2019 was retrieved from a published systematic review. A subsequent search was conducted from seven electronic databases to identify additional studies from 2019 to 2022. Potential opioid safety prescribing indicators were extracted from studies that reported prescribing indicators of non-injectable opioids and narcotics prescribed to adults with or without specific conditions, concomitant medications, or laboratory monitoring with concerns about the potential safety risk of harm. Retrieved indicators were split by each opioid and merged for the same drugs. Identified indicators were categorised by the type of problem, medication, patient condition/disease, and the risk of the indicators. ResultsOf the 107 indicators retrieved from 48 included articles, 71 were included. Thirty-five (49.3%) opioid prescribing indicators focused on a specific class of opioids, i.e., opioids (n=30, 42.3%) and strong opioids (n=5, 7.0%); tramadol and fentanyl were the most commonly reported drug (n=6, 8.5%). The indicators account for six types of problems: medication inappropriate to the population (n=16), omission (n=7), inappropriate duration (n=4), inadequate monitoring (n=7), drug-disease interaction (n=16), and drug-drug interaction (n=27). Of all indicators, older age (over 65) is the most common risk factor (n=34, 47.9%). Central nervous system-related adverse effects are the risk of concern for the 27 indicators associated with drug-drug interaction (n=24, 88.9%). Besides, five of the six omission indicators are related to without using laxatives. ConclusionThis review identified a comprehensive list of indicators that can be applied to flag patients with a high risk of opioid-related harm to facilitate complex decision-making in optimising opioids for pain management. Further research is needed to validate and determine the feasibility of identifying hazardous prescribing in various care settings.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Interventions to reduce opioid use for patients with chronic non-cancer pain in primary care settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis 95%
- Assessment of knowledge and perception of prescribers towards rational medicine use in the Ashanti Region of Ghana 95%
- Trends of long-term opioid therapy and subsequent discontinuation among people with chronic non-cancer pain in UK primary care: a retrospective cohort study 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- An overview of global monitoring systems for the side effects and adverse events associated with medicinal cannabis use: A scoping review using a systematic approach 94%
- Acute Pain Pathways: protocol for a prospective cohort study 94%
- Risks of use and non-use of antibiotics in primary care. Qualitative study of prescribers' views 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Optimizing hospital opioid deprescribing: a multi-level consensus study bridging evidence, expertise, and patient perspectives 97%
- Trends and Patterns of Opioid Epidemic: A Large-Scale Retrospective Study of Hospital Visits with Opioid Poisoning in New York State, 2010-2016 94%
- A Systematic review and Network Meta-analysis of pharmaceutical interventions used to manage chronic pain 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- A user-driven framework for dose selection in pregnancy: proof-of-concept for sertraline 91%
- Role of Drugs used for chronic disease management on Susceptibility and Severity of COVID-19: A Large Case-Control Study 91%
- DrugWAS: Leveraging drug-wide association studies to facilitate drug repurposing for COVID-19 90%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.