Search

Introduction Diversion of prescription opioid medication is a contributor to the opioid epidemic. Safe handling practices can reduce the risk of diversion. We aimed to understand: 1) if orthopaedic patients received instructions on how to safely handle opioids, 2) their typical storage/disposal practices, and 3) their willingness to participate in an opioid disposal program (ODP). Methods Cross-sectional study of adult orthopaedic patients who completed an anonymous survey on current or past prescription opioid use, instruction on handling, storage and disposal practices, presence of children in the household, and willingness to participate in an ODP. Frequencies and percentages of responses were computed, both overall and stratified by possession of unused opioids. Results 569 respondents who reported either current or past prescription opioid use were analyzed. 44% reported receiving storage instructions and 56% reported receiving disposal instructions from a health care provider. Many respondents indicated unsafe handling practices: possessing unused opioids (34%), using unsafe storage methods (90%), and using unsafe disposal methods (34%). Respondents with unused opioids were less likely to report receiving handling instructions or using safe handling methods, and 47% of this group reported having minors or young adults in the household. Respondents who received storage and disposal instructions were more likely to report safe storage and disposal methods. Seventy-four percent of respondents reported that they would participate in an ODP. Conclusion While many orthopaedic patients report inadequate education on safe opioid handling and using unsafe handling practices, findings suggest targeted education is associated with better behaviours. However, patients are willing to safely dispose of unused medication if provided a convenient option. These findings suggest a need to address patient knowledge and behavior regarding opioid handling to reduce the risk of opioid diversion.

© 2019 Hebert et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Objective Identify patient subgroups defined by trajectories of pain and disability following surgery for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis, and investigate the construct validity of the subgroups by evaluating for meaningful differences in clinical outcomes. Methods We recruited patients with degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis from 13 surgical spine centers who were deemed to be surgical candidates. Study outcomes (leg and back pain numeric rating scales, modified Oswestry disability index) were measured before surgery, and after 3, 12, and 24 months. Group-based trajectory models were developed to identify trajectory subgroups for leg pain, back pain, and pain-related disability. We examined for differences in the proportion of patients achieving minimum clinically important change in pain and disability (30%) and clinical success (50% reduction in disability or Oswestry score ≤22) 12 months from surgery. Results Data from 548 patients (mean[SD] age = 66.7[9.1] years; 46% female) were included. The models estimated 3 unique trajectories for leg pain (excellent outcome = 14.4%, good outcome = 49.5%, poor outcome = 36.1%), back pain (excellent outcome = 13.1%, good outcome = 45.0%, poor outcome = 41.9%), and disability (excellent outcome = 30.8%, fair outcome = 40.1%, poor outcome = 29.1%). The construct validity of the trajectory subgroups was confirmed by between-trajectory group differences in the proportion of patients meeting thresholds for minimum clinically important change and clinical success after 12 postoperative months (p < .001). Conclusion Subgroups of patients with degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis can be identified by their trajectories of pain and disability following surgery. Although most patients experienced important reductions in pain and disability, 29% to 42% of patients were classified as members of an outcome trajectory subgroup that experienced little to no benefit from surgery. These findings may inform appropriate expectation setting for patients and clinicians and highlight the need for better methods of treatment selection for patients with degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis.

BackgroundThere is currently no standardized method for measuring functional status in knee osteoarthritis (OA) patients, despite that it is one of the top priorities when determining eligibility for total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The purpose of the current investigation was to identify factors associated with discordance between individual self-report and performance-based measures of function for obese and non-obese men and women with knee OA.MethodsIn a cohort of 727 knee OA patients scheduled for TKA, physical function prior to surgery was assessed with the self-reported physical function subscale of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC-pf), and the performance-based Timed Up and Go (TUG). Data on sociodemographic characteristics, health status, knee pain intensity, symptomatic joint site count, and pain catastrophizing were collected via questionnaire. The primary outcome was the difference in rescaled score between a participant's self-report and performance-based measures of function. Multivariable linear regression stratified by sex and obesity status was used to identify factors associated with discordance.ResultsThe mean age of participants was 65.5 years and 55% were women. With younger age, self-reported scores indicated increasingly worse function compared to performance-based scores, regardless of sex or obesity status. Among non-obese individuals, greater knee pain intensity was associated with a participant's self-report score indicating increasingly worse function compared to their performance-based score. For obese women, pain catastrophizing, and number of symptomatic joints were also associated with discordance as was reporting fewer comorbidities.ConclusionsPhysical function may be differentially represented by self-reported and performance-based measures depending on a variety of patient factors. Our findings add to the evidence which suggests both measures should be used when assessing functional status prior to TKA.

BACKGROUND:There is convincing preclinical evidence that early decompression in the setting of spinal cord injury (SCI) improves neurologic outcomes. However, the effect of early surgical decompression in patients with acute SCI remains uncertain. Our objective was to evaluate the relative effectiveness of early (