Several times in this blog we have discussed our preference for the term ‘opioid’ rather than ‘narcotic’ when referring to the substances (natural, synthetic, endogenous, exogenous) that
occupy the mu receptor. See here and here for a couple of examples. Note the comments, as well. An interesting small, simple, and direct study from the Pittsburgh Veterans Administration Hospital has addressed the important issue of what patients understand when they hear the terms ‘opioid’ and ‘narcotic.’ One of our readers previously commented that using ‘narcotic’ makes sense since that’s the term patients (and other lay people) use and understand. On the basis of this study’s findings, she’s right. The researchers asked 4 (almost) identical questions of 100 people in a clinic waiting room. The “almost” part means that half the patients were asked about the term opioid and half about the term narcotic. The questions: “What is a narcotic/opioid?” “Give an example of a narcotic/opioid.” “Why does someone take a narcotic/opioid?” “What happens when someone takes a narcotic/opioid for a long time?”The findings are both surprising and not. 83% of the patients in the opioid group did not know what it means; only 10% did not know what narcotic means. Actually both numbers sound high to me. Strikes me as nearly impossible to get well into the adult years without knowing what a narcotic is. I guess its more disappointing than surprising that so many patients don’t recognize the term opioid. Subjects in this study were recruited from outpatient primary care and surgical clinics. There was no breakdown of answers by clinic reported. Of the patients who recognized either term, only half in each group associated it with pain management in their definition and again when asked why someone would take an opioid/narcotic. Again, that is disappointing, but in my somewhat jaded view that may well be higher than the results you’d get polling reporters, DEA agents, politicians, politically-inclined prosecutors, and maybe some strata of the general population.
One of the major concerns expressed by those of us who worry about the negative legal and addiction associations of “narcotic” when applied to pain management was confirmed, but the numbers weren’t too bad, considering. 19 of 50 respondents associated abuse and illegal drugs with the term narcotic. The bad news is that 90% of the people who answered the question on what happens when someone takes an opioid/narcotic for a long time referenced addiction or an adverse outcome and the vast majority of those specified addiction.
The bottom line is that, if these results are generalizable, we have a lot of educating to do, at all levels and via all media.
2]
This must be VA day at Pallimed. Paul Rousseau, a well-known palliative care doc at the
Phoenix, AZ VA hospital wrote a short essay for The Left Atrium column in the Canadian Medical Association Journal called ABCs of Medicine. Seemed like the kind of piece you might write after a long day—or week—of tiredly swimming against the continually rising tide of depersonalization that “the System” has become. The trigger is an admission note that begins: “62-year-old male admitted for hospice placement with the diagnoses of HIV, DVT, PTSD, GERD, BPH and PUD.” Digging a bit, he is able to conclude that the patient is a “pleasant and alphabetized man who is dying, no longer smokes, and lives with his wife.” He muses on the various reasons for the “psychosocial silence in this chart.”3]
One more from the VA: this is a short review of opioid-induced hyperalgesia. It’s not very me
aty and it is not a how-to article, but it succinctly lays out the prevailing theories/models of opioid-induced hyperalgesia and the three thus-far-identified interventions: opioid rotation (enough evidence to recommend it as a first line intervention); addition of an NMDA receptor antagonist such as ketamine or dextromethorphan (evidence not very strong and not recommended); addition of an ultra-low dose of an opioid antagonist (again, evidence noy very strong and not recommended). The authors point out that there is an investigational agent (Oxytrex) currently in clinical trials that combines oxycodone and naltrexone for pain management.4]
Check out this title: “A matter of definition—key elements identified in a discourse analysis of definitions of palliative care.” Sounds terribly dry, but it turns out to be surprisingly readable
and so well put together that I will make it required reading of my students next semester. The article is fascinating from an historical, etymological, sociological, and cross-cultural perspective. The authors are all palliative medicine physicians (turns out there is no translation for palliative care other than ‘palliativmedezin’ in Germany) affiliated with German universities. They searched for definitions of ‘palliative care’ and ‘palliative medicine’ in Google and in textbooks, finding a total of 35 definitions in English and 26 in German. They then used discursive practice—“a process by which cultural meanings are produced and understood”—to analyze the definitions.Key elements identified were target groups, structure, tasks, expertise, theoretical principles, and goals of palliative care.
Among the conclusions:
- The term palliative care is a pleonasm (a new word for me—means redundant) since both palliative and care are concerned with the issue of protection.
- Palliative care/medicine is unlike any other specialty since it doesn’t have a specific object of study nor define itself by the age of its patients
- In fact, it has a hard time defining its population of focus at all. Protection of the patient “means a comprehensive and at the same time diffuse orientation.”
- Only a very few definitions explicitly describe the philosophy of palliative care.
- Having the family and patient as both the unit of care and as members of the care team creates some inherent role difficulties
- There is no consensus on the meaning of the terms multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary
- There is an emphasis on symptom control, but Kearny is quoted as warning against becoming a ‘symptomatologist,’ as symptom management is only the beginning of palliative care therapy.
- In that context, the human being is the focus of care, the goals address suffering and quality of life, and emphasizing wholeness through a respect for autonomy and dignity is a defining value.
- Interestingly, the current American definitions are seen to de-emphasize death and dying as compared to historical and some European definitions.
There is much more and I can’t do it justice in this space. This is a great journal club article, and can be grist for both introductory discussion and reflection on practice and meaning for veterans and their teams.
References:
Mangione MP, Crowley-Matoka M. Improving Pain Management Communication: How Patients Understand the Terms "Opioid" and "Narcotic." J Gen Intern Med. 2008 May 31. [Epub ahead of print]
Rousseau P. ABCs of medicine. CMAJ. 2008 Jun 3;178(12):1580-1581.
Leonard R, Kourlas H. Too much of a good thing? Treating the emerging syndrome of opioid-induced hyperalgesia. J. P-harm Pract 2008;21(2):165-168.
Pastrana T, Jünger S, Ostgathe C, Elsner F, Radbruch L. A matter of definition - key elements identified in a discourse analysis of definitions of palliative care. Palliat Med. 2008 Apr;22(3):222-32.