Suppr超能文献

阿片类药物处方:慢性疼痛治疗指南的系统评价和批判性评估。

Opioid prescribing: a systematic review and critical appraisal of guidelines for chronic pain.

出版信息

Ann Intern Med. 2014 Jan 7;160(1):38-47. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-160-1-201401070-00732.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Deaths due to prescription opioid overdoses have increased dramatically. High-quality guidelines could help clinicians mitigate risks associated with opioid therapy.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the quality and content of guidelines on the use of opioids for chronic pain.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, National Guideline Clearinghouse, specialty society Web sites, and international guideline clearinghouses (searched in July 2013).

STUDY SELECTION

Guidelines published between January 2007 and July 2013 addressing the use of opioids for chronic pain in adults were selected. Guidelines on specific settings, populations, and conditions were excluded.

DATA EXTRACTION

Guidelines and associated systematic reviews were evaluated using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument and A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR), respectively, and recommendations for mitigating opioid-related risks were compared.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Thirteen guidelines met selection criteria. Overall AGREE II scores were 3.00 to 6.20 (on a scale of 1 to 7). The AMSTAR ratings were poor to fair for 10 guidelines. Two received high AGREE II and AMSTAR scores. Most guidelines recommend that clinicians avoid doses greater than 90 to 200 mg of morphine equivalents per day, have additional knowledge to prescribe methadone, recognize risks of fentanyl patches, titrate cautiously, and reduce doses by at least 25% to 50% when switching opioids. Guidelines also agree that opioid risk assessment tools, written treatment agreements, and urine drug testing can mitigate risks. Most recommendations are supported by observational data or expert consensus.

LIMITATION

Exclusion of non-English-language guidelines and reliance on published information.

CONCLUSION

Despite limited evidence and variable development methods, recent guidelines on chronic pain agree on several opioid risk mitigation strategies, including upper dosing thresholds; cautions with certain medications; attention to drug-drug and drug-disease interactions; and use of risk assessment tools, treatment agreements, and urine drug testing. Future research should directly examine the effectiveness of opioid risk mitigation strategies.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

California Department of Industrial Relations and California Commission on Health and Safety and Workers' Compensation.

摘要

背景

因处方类阿片类药物过量而导致的死亡人数显著增加。高质量的指南可以帮助临床医生降低与阿片类药物治疗相关的风险。

目的

评估关于慢性疼痛中使用阿片类药物的指南的质量和内容。

数据来源

MEDLINE、国家指南清除库、专业协会网站和国际指南清除库(2013 年 7 月检索)。

研究选择

选择了 2007 年 1 月至 2013 年 7 月期间发表的针对成人慢性疼痛使用阿片类药物的指南。排除了针对特定环境、人群和条件的指南。

数据提取

使用评估研究和评估指南 II(AGREE II)工具和评估系统评价的测量工具(AMSTAR)评估指南和相关的系统评价,并比较了减轻阿片类药物相关风险的建议。

数据综合

13 项指南符合入选标准。总体 AGREE II 评分为 3.00 至 6.20(满分 7 分)。10 项指南的 AMSTAR 评级为差至中等。两项指南获得了较高的 AGREE II 和 AMSTAR 评分。大多数指南建议临床医生避免每日剂量大于 90 至 200 毫克吗啡当量,具备额外的美沙酮处方知识,认识芬太尼贴片的风险,谨慎滴定,并在转换阿片类药物时至少减少 25%至 50%的剂量。指南还一致认为,阿片类药物风险评估工具、书面治疗协议和尿液药物检测可以降低风险。大多数建议都有观察数据或专家共识的支持。

局限性

排除非英语语言指南和依赖已发表信息。

结论

尽管证据有限且开发方法不同,但最近关于慢性疼痛的指南在几个阿片类药物风险缓解策略上达成一致,包括最高剂量限制;对某些药物的谨慎使用;注意药物相互作用和药物疾病相互作用;以及使用风险评估工具、治疗协议和尿液药物检测。未来的研究应该直接检验阿片类药物风险缓解策略的有效性。

主要资金来源

加利福尼亚州工业关系部和加利福尼亚州健康与安全及工人补偿委员会。

相似文献

5
Opioids for cancer pain - an overview of Cochrane reviews.用于癌症疼痛的阿片类药物——Cochrane系统评价综述
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Jul 6;7(7):CD012592. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012592.pub2.
9
Pharmacologic management of chronic low back pain: synthesis of the evidence.慢性下背痛的药物治疗管理:证据综合。
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2011 Oct 1;36(21 Suppl):S131-43. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31822f178f.

引用本文的文献

2
Consensus statement on chronic pain treatment in cancer survivors.癌症幸存者慢性疼痛治疗共识声明。
J Anesth. 2025 Apr;39(2):161-181. doi: 10.1007/s00540-024-03427-0. Epub 2024 Dec 4.
3
A Review of Remote Monitoring in Neuromodulation for Chronic Pain Management.用于慢性疼痛管理的神经调节远程监测综述
Curr Pain Headache Rep. 2024 Dec;28(12):1225-1233. doi: 10.1007/s11916-024-01302-x. Epub 2024 Jul 27.

本文引用的文献

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验