Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35024834›Full record

SynthesisJAMA network open2022

Evaluation of Interventions to Reduce Opioid Prescribing for Patients Discharged From the Emergency Department: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Raoul Daoust, Jean Paquet, Martin Marquis, Jean-Marc Chauny, David Williamson, Vérilibe Huard, Caroline Arbour, Marcel Émond, Alexis Cournoyer

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in JAMA network open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Opioid prescribing requirements to minimize unused medications after an emergency department visit for acute pain: a prospective cohort study.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2024
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Raoul DaoustStudy Center in Emergency Medicine, Hôpital du Sacré-Coeur de Montréal, Le Centre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux (CIUSSS) du Nord-de-l'Île de-Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Jean PaquetStudy Center in Emergency Medicine, Hôpital du Sacré-Coeur de Montréal, Le Centre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux (CIUSSS) du Nord-de-l'Île de-Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Martin MarquisStudy Center in Emergency Medicine, Hôpital du Sacré-Coeur de Montréal, Le Centre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux (CIUSSS) du Nord-de-l'Île de-Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Jean-Marc ChaunyStudy Center in Emergency Medicine, Hôpital du Sacré-Coeur de Montréal, Le Centre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux (CIUSSS) du Nord-de-l'Île de-Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
David WilliamsonCentre de Recherche de l'Hôpital du Sacré-Coeur de Montréal, CIUSSS du Nord de-l'Île-de-Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Vérilibe HuardStudy Center in Emergency Medicine, Hôpital du Sacré-Coeur de Montréal, Le Centre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux (CIUSSS) du Nord-de-l'Île de-Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Caroline ArbourCentre de Recherche de l'Hôpital du Sacré-Coeur de Montréal, CIUSSS du Nord de-l'Île-de-Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Marcel ÉmondDépartement de Médecine Familiale et de Médecine d'Urgence, Faculté de Médecine, Université Laval, Québec, Québec, Canada.
Alexis CournoyerStudy Center in Emergency Medicine, Hôpital du Sacré-Coeur de Montréal, Le Centre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux (CIUSSS) du Nord-de-l'Île de-Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Limiting opioid overprescribing in the emergency department (ED) may be associated with decreases in diversion and misuse. Objective: To review and analyze interventions designed to reduce the rate of opioid prescriptions or the quantity prescribed for pain in adults discharged from the ED. Data Sources: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials databases and the gray literature were searched from inception to May 15, 2020, with an updated search performed March 6, 2021. Study Selection: Intervention studies aimed at reducing opioid prescribing at ED discharge were first screened using titles and abstracts. The full text of the remaining citations was then evaluated against inclusion and exclusion criteria by 2 independent reviewers. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Data were extracted independently by 2 reviewers who also assessed the risk of bias. Authors were contacted for missing data. The main meta-analysis was accompanied by intervention category subgroup analyses. All meta-analyses used random-effects models, and heterogeneity was quantified using I2 values. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the variation in opioid prescription rate and/or prescribed quantity associated with the interventions. Effect sizes were computed separately for interrupted time series (ITS) studies. Results: Sixty-three unique studies were included in the review, and 45 studies had sufficient data to be included in the meta-analysis. A statistically significant reduction in the opioid prescription rate was observed for both ITS (6-month step change, -22.61%; 95% CI, -30.70% to -14.52%) and other (odds ratio, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.45-0.70) study designs. No statistically significant reduction in prescribed opioid quantities was observed for ITS studies (6-month step change, -8.64%; 95% CI, -17.48% to 0.20%), but a small, statistically significant reduction was observed for other study designs (standardized mean difference, -0.30; 95% CI, -0.51 to -0.09). For ITS studies, education, policies, and guideline interventions (6-month step change, -33.31%; 95% CI, -39.67% to -26.94%) were better at reducing the opioid prescription rate compared with prescription drug monitoring programs and laws (6-month step change, -11.18%; 95% CI, -22.34% to -0.03%). Most intervention categories did not reduce prescribed opioid quantities. Insufficient data were available on patient-centered outcomes such as pain relief or patients' satisfaction. Conclusions and Relevance: This systematic review and meta-analysis found that most interventions reduced the opioid prescription rate but not the prescribed opioid quantity for ED-discharged patients. More studies on patient-centered outcomes and using novel approaches to reduce the opioid quantity per prescription are needed. Trial Registration: PROSPERO Identifier: CRD42020187251.

Indexed as

Analgesics, OpioidEmergency Service, HospitalHumansInterrupted Time Series AnalysisPainPain ManagementPatient DischargePractice Patterns, Physicians'Prescription Drug Monitoring ProgramsAnalgesics, Opioid

Identifiers

PMID35024834
PMCPMC8759006

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.