Next month I will be presenting a paper at the annual meeting of ASAM, the American Society of Addiction Medicine. The paper discusses a new method for treating chronic pain, using a combination of buprenorphine and opioid agonists. In my experience, the combination works very well, providing excellent analgesia and at the same time reducing—even eliminating– the euphoria from opioids.

Ten years ago, I would have really been onto something. Back then there were calls from all corners to improve the pain control for patients. The popular belief regarding pain control was that some unfortunate patients were being denied adequate doses of opioid medications. I remember our hospital administrators, in advance of the next JCAHO visit, worried about pain relief in patients who for one or another reason couldn’t describe or report their pain. Posters were put up in each patient room, showing simple drawings of facial expressions ranging from smiles to frowns, so that patients in pain could simply point at the face that exhibited their own level of misery.

What a difference a decade makes! Purdue Pharma, the manufacturer of Oxycontin, was fined over $600 million for claims that their medication was less addictive than other, immediate-release pain-killers. Thousands of young Americans have died from overdoses of pain medications, many that came from their parents’ medicine cabinets. Physician members of PROP, Physicians for Responsible Opioid Prescribing, have called out physicians at the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health for having ties to Purdue while arguing against added regulations for potent narcotics.

I have tried to present both sides of the pain pill debate, without disclosing my OWN opinions on the issue—at least until today. And I must be at least somewhat ‘fair and balanced,’ because I’ve received angry messages from both sides—from people telling me I’m evil for not understanding their need for pain medications, and from people telling me I’m evil for not respecting the danger of the medications.

By the way… I have a policy of not printing messages that simply call me names, or that tell me how bad a doctor I must be for writing what I do. I love a good argument, so please feel free to comment on ANY points that I’m trying to make. But I don’t think that making efforts to lead a discussion warrants personal attacks—so please, stick to the issues!

Today, though, I would like to share a couple thoughts on the issue. The thoughts came after a discussion with one of my patients with chronic pain. I have been presenting one side, then the other side, and back again, trying to remain neutral… but from all that I’ve seen as a psychiatrist and as an anesthesiologist, some things cannot be denied.

1. Some people do have chronic pain that responds to opioids. Many doctors—including the doctors who are afraid of the DEA, or the doctors who don’t want to deal with the hard work of prescribing opioids, or the doctors who want a simple world where ‘pain pills are always bad’—don’t want to admit the truth of this statement. This is, with apologies to Al Gore, a very inconvenient truth.

I find it interesting that doctors who don’t want to prescribe pain pills act as if chronic pain does not exist– as if the suffering of people with painful disorders is less important in some way, if it lasts too long. Every prescriber is aware of the need to treat acute pain, but when it comes to chronic pain, the difficulties that arise with treatment (e.g. abuse, diversion, tolerance) lead some doctors to act as if something magical happens on the road from acute to chronic. The phenomenon is the exact opposite of the old saying, ‘to a man with a hammer, everything looks like a nail.’ In this case, ‘to doctors who don’t want to use hammers, there ARE NO NAILS.’ But in truth, there ARE nails; some patients have lots of them. And we doctors have a duty to hammer away at them… (OK, enough with the analogy already!).

2. Just because some people divert opioids does not mean that other people shouldn’t have necessary pain relief. Treating pain is about as fundamental as medicine can be. I do not understand the doctors who say ‘I do not treat pain—you’ll have to see someone else’—especially when there are no doctors available to fill that role. More and more ‘health systems’ are adopting this position, at least in my area. What gives?!

3. At the same time, there is no such thing as ‘complete pain control.’ Tolerance removes the power of narcotics, and chasing tolerance always ends badly. Patients with chronic pain must use ALL tools available, including non-narcotic techniques.

4. Being prescribed pain medications comes with certain responsibilities; the responsibility to use the medications appropriately, to communicate openly and truthfully with the prescriber, to avoid ‘doctor-shopping,’ etc. At some point, patients who refuse to honor these responsibilities will lose access to pain medications—at least to some extent. Is this humane or fair? I think so, as access to pain relief for these patients is balanced against the lives of those killed by illicit use of these medications.

I’m sure I could go on… but for now, this is enough food for thought. Besides, it’s almost time for dinner! Feel free to comment—but please, be nice!

It has been a while, it seems, since I’ve checked in.  I’m at the point in the life cycle of a ‘blogger’ where I feel like I’ve said most of what I came here to say… so help me out by sending your questions, particularly those with broad implications, and I’ll chime in with an opinion.

In the meantime, check out the ‘best of’ page;  I have links there to some of the more popular post.   And for now, I’ll answer a question I received today on ‘TheFix.com’:

Do you believe in intervention of someone who does not ask or desire (to be clean)?

It is hard to predict human behavior; sometimes people rise to the occasion when all appears to be lost, and other times people who have everything going their way make surprisingly poor decisions.  But in my experience, real sobriety requires the addict to feel a profound need to change that comes from within. 

More common than you think!

That doesn’t mean, necessarily, that interventions never work—but the intervention should be set up in such a way that the addict or alcoholic—him or herself– comes to the realization that getting clean is the only option. 

For example… let’s say that grandma has a problem with pain pills, taking more than what is prescribed, going to multiple doctors, going to the ER for pain pills, etc.  Her children don’t like her behavior, so they stage an intervention, to show her the problems her behavior is causing.  At the intervention, they tell her how hurt her grandchildren are by her absence at their functions, and they explain the risks of her behavior.  They set her up at a treatment center, and she is shipped off for 30 days.

She may go to all of the groups and meetings in treatment, agreeing politely in every setting that she has a serious problem, and that she really ‘gets it.’  And that would be great for the treatment center; they would collect their $30K, and everyone there would congratulate each other on how compassionate and bright they are. And later, when grandma is doing the exact thing she was doing before treatment, the counselors would put the blame on HER, acting as if SHE has a problem for not sticking to plan—even though almost all of their patients end up the same.

I used to be a bigger fan of residential treatment. But at some point I let go of the fantasy of residential treatment as the ‘gold standard’, and accepted the real numbers.  It is easy to clean a person up for a month in a closed environment.  But in regard to long-term sobriety… residential treatment rarely works.  Sorry to say something so horrible—but that emperor, sadly, has no clothes.

So back to grandma… I would expect her to go back to the same behavior after treatment. Why, after hearing from all the family, would she do that?

Because true change is very, very difficult. 

Besides, she has plenty of reasons to keep things the same.  She will likely think that the problem isn’t the use of pain pills, but rather that she didn’t hide things well enough.  Or she will assume that other people simply don’t understand what it is like to be 70 years old, trying to live with pain. She used to change the smelly diapers of these kids;  what could they possibly tell her that she doesn’t know?

And the major reason she won’t change?  For her to truly realize that her behavior is a problem, she would have to endure the shame for what was going on—and shame is a very strong motivator for denial.

In treatment, the team will try to try to break through that denial and have her admit, to herself, that she has a problem.  But that type of admission is rare, and only comes out when a person is desperate—and when there is no choice but to change.

But there are other ways to manage an intervention.  It would be best if grandma herself decides, at some point, that things must change.  How does that happen?  First, everyone has to stop enabling her.  If the grandchildren are angry that grandma didn’t show up at their birthdays, they should be allowed to express that anger—and when grandma protests, she is forced to hear why people are mad.  If grandma runs into problems with the doctor or pharmacist, nobody should help her sort things out;  she is left to juggle excuses on her own.  If she needs the ER for pain pills, she drives herself—or waits for a cab.

I chose ‘grandma,’ by the way, because I wanted to present the challenge of dealing with a person who deserves sympathy.  Nobody does her a favor by keeping her miserable.  Realize, though, that we are discussing addiction here;  I’m not suggesting that people abandon loved ones struggling with painful conditions!

The doctor should prescribe medications on a tight schedule, with strict refill dates that are maintained without exception.  Doctors are sometimes afraid to let people go into withdrawal, so they order ‘a few extra pills’ to get to the next refill;  medications should be long-lasting, so that withdrawal is uncomfortable, but not dangerous.  A short period of the medication- i.e. a one-week supply—will reduce the period of withdrawal.  If a person struggles to follow limits, the prescribing period is shortened until the person CAN follow it—even to the point of 3-day prescriptions with multiple refills.  If grandma complains about the multiple trips to the pharmacy, she is told that period will be lengthened if she sticks to the schedule— and shortened if she doesn’t.

The point of all of this is to make the person with the problem feel the consequences of their problem.  Too often, everyone else is aware of the need for an intervention, because everyone else feels the consequences—everyone but the addict.  The trick is to make the consequences hit the person who has the problem—and for everyone else to get on with life, until the person with the problem is sick and tired of those consequences.

Of course, every now and then an intervention turns out to be meaningful enough to get a person’s attention, and to spur change.  But in my experience those types of outcomes—the things we see on TV and in movies—are not the norm.

An Article by Mike Berens and Ken Armstrong, Seattle Times, discusses some of the problems with using methadone as a first-line treatment for pain:

When it comes to battling pain, Washington health officials have encouraged doctors to reach for methadone, a powerful and inexpensive prescription drug. For the past decade, the state has declared methadone to be as safe and effective as any other narcotic painkiller.

Methadone

But in a striking reversal that has gained momentum this week, doctors are receiving stark warnings that methadone is riskier and more dangerous — a drug of last resort — because it’s unpredictable and poses a heightened risk of accidental death.

“It’s a dangerous drug because it accumulates in the body and people die in their sleep,” Dr. Jane Ballantyne, a pain specialist at the University of Washington, said Friday. “It’s very tricky and difficult to use safely.”

Ballantyne and the university are helping spearhead a series of state-sponsored training programs to educate physicians, pharmacists and advanced nurse practitioners about the risks of pain drugs.

Earlier this week, while delivering a continuing medical education course for dozens of physicians and other medical professionals at the university, Ballantyne presented a slideshow in which she cautioned that methadone “should be considered a last option opioid, never a first line opioid.”

The state’s effort is a response to a Seattle Times series, “Methadone and the Politics of Pain.” The investigation, published in December, detailed that at least 2,173 people in Washington have died from accidental overdoses of the drug since 2003.

The Times found that year after year, a committee of state-appointed medical experts sanctioned methadone, empowering the state to designate it a “preferred drug” and steer people with state-subsidized health care — most notably, Medicaid patients — to the drug in order to save money.

The state has included only two drugs, methadone and morphine, on its preferred list of long-acting pain drugs.

During the committee’s meetings, officials from state agencies that have a financial stake in methadone’s selection consistently deflected concerns about the drug.

Methadone’s death toll has hit the hardest among low-income patients. Medicaid recipients account for about 8 percent of Washington’s adult population but 48 percent of methadone fatalities.

After the series, the state sent out an emergency public-health advisory that singled out the unique risks of methadone.

Medicaid officials faxed a health advisory to more than 1,000 pharmacists and drugstores about methadone, as well as about oxycodone, fentanyl and morphine. The state Department of Health mailed advisories to about 17,000 licensed health-care professionals.

The health advisory confirmed that Washington ranks among states with the highest rates of opioid-related deaths, exceeding the number of deaths each year involving motor vehicles.

Most painkillers, such as oxycodone, dissipate from the body within hours. Methadone can linger for days, pool into a toxic reservoir and depress breathing. With little warning, patients fall asleep and don’t wake up. Doctors call it the silent death.

Ballantyne noted that methadone is an indispensable drug and plays an important role in the treatment of many patients. However, due to the heightened risks, methadone should be prescribed only by those with extensive training and experience — and only after every other option has been exhausted.

Dr. Jeff Thompson, chief medical officer of the state’s Medicaid program, now readily agrees that methadone use carries unique risks and that it should not be the first choice if other drugs are equally suitable.

He said physicians are stepping up efforts to unravel the long-term impact on the body from prolonged use of prescription drugs now that Washington’s new pain-management law has gone into full force beginning this month.

The groundbreaking law requires practitioners to follow new standards for treatment and record-keeping. It also requires prescribers to consult with state-certified pain experts when narcotic dosages reach higher thresholds.

While the law’s goal is to lower doses and, if possible, wean patients from narcotic pain drugs, doctors are finding the task more difficult than hoped, Thompson said.

For instance, methadone patients can suffer prolonged withdrawal symptoms, like nausea and depression. With most pain drugs, withdrawal subsides within a week. Methadone’s grip can last for months, even years, he said.

State officials will review methadone’s role on the state’s preferred drug list during a meeting next month.

“I think we’re going back and relearning how to treat pain,” Thompson said.

Wow. I just read an email about a story that I was vaguely aware of– about a doctor in Kansas and his wife, who were together linked to scores of overdose deaths. But that is just the beginning. The doctor was supported, during his trial, by Siobhan Reynolds, founder of a nonprofit advocacy group called ‘Pain Relief Network.’  She started the group back in 2003, when her ex-husband was suffering from severe pain from a congenital connective tissue disorder.

He (the ex-husband) found relief in combinations of high-dose opioids and benzodiazepines, at least until his doctor, Virginia pain specialist William Hurwitz, was convicted on 16 counts of drug trafficking.  The ex died, by the way, in 2006.  Are you still with me?

The trial of the Kansas doctor, Stephen Schneider, went on for years.  During the trial, Ms. Reynolds apparently helped support what she considered to be a ‘dream team’ of attorneys.  She used the case as an opportunity to increase her visibility, encouraging the Schneiders to aggressively fight the charges against them on the basis of ‘patient rights.’  Ms. Reynolds, through the Schneiders, argued that suffering patients are being denied appropriate care because of a war, waged by overly-aggressive prosecutors, against doctors who prescribe pain medication.

Ms. Reynolds even paid for a billboard adjacent to the road to the courthouse, so that jurors could see, en route, the statement “Dr. Schneider Never Killed Anyone.”  Some might see the billboard as ‘free speech’, but the judge presiding over the case was not amused.  At the eventual sentencing, the judge gave both Dr. Schneider and his wife over 30 years in prison, hoping that the sentences would “curtail or stop the activities of the Bozo the Clown outfit known as the Pain [Relief] Network, a ship of fools if there ever was one.”

We already have enough drama for a made for TV movie.  Actually there already is one, made by Ms. Reynolds, about her ex’s struggle over finding appropriate pain treatment.  The hour-long film is called ‘The Chilling Effect,’ and can be found here– along with a number of vignettes about the efforts of the Pain Relief Network.

Make that the former Pain Relief Network.  Ms. Reynolds was investigated by a Grand Jury, led by the same prosecutor who led the efforts against Dr. Schneider.  After years of what she considered to be ‘vindictive efforts,’ she closed down Pain Relief Network, saying that the organization’s finances ‘were in shambles.’

Within weeks of closing PRN, Ms. Reynolds lost her life in a plane crash.  Piloting the plane, and also killed, was Kevin Byers– Ms. Reynold’s romantic partner and also– get this– attorney for the wife of Dr. Schneider.

Our story ends in typical, made for TV fashion, with all of the loose ends tied up.  The Pain Relief Network is gone, tragically missed by some, and considered ‘good riddance’ by others.  Ms. Reynolds, tireless advocate or misguided fanatic, has left this world for the next.  Left behind are the story-tellers;  I will provide links to both sides, so that readers can have a true, balanced perspective.  From the PRN side, simply go to their former web site, and you will find links to the archives.  The archives contain links to stories in a number of publications, including Slate and the NYT– places where David and Goliath stories are repeated without much challenge, particularly for the Davids.

On the other side is a woman named Marianne Skolek, writer for the Salem News online site, who has little positive to say about Ms. Reynolds and PRN.  For years she has chronicled the epidemic of deaths from Oxycontin, and she has also written a number of articles about the Schneiders, Reynolds, and PRN.  One of the most chilling points in a story by M. Skolek is a a list of the patients who saw Dr. Schneider and who died shortly afterward.  The pattern is clear; people in sudden possession of large numbers of pain pills, who took amounts sufficient to end their lives:

The story is not quite over.  The Schneiders are now appealing their convictions, claiming insufficient counsel– namely that the romantic involvement of one of their attorneys with Ms. Reynolds created a conflict that led to poor counsel.  In other words, they may have asked for mercy, had Ms. Reynolds not been cheering them and their attorney to place everything on the line.

As I’ve written many times, the use of opioids for chronic pain is a complicated issue, with no clear ‘good’ or ‘bad’ side. As in most of life’s challenges, the extremes of each position appear…. extreme.  Ms. Reynolds believed that the Controlled Substances Act should be repealed;  I find it difficult to understand how any educated person would adopt such an approach.  But the extreme opposite side leads to enough fear, in physicians, to stifle the use of narcotic pain relievers in people who truly need such relief.  As for me, I keep trying to straddle the wide middle.

Written by Daniel Gordon at ThirdAge.com:

Former Weezer bassist Mikey Welsh was found dead in a Chicago hotel room Saturday afternoon, the Chicago Tribune reports.

Raffaello Hotel staff reportedly found the 40-year-old ex-musician on the floor of his room around 1 p.m. Saturday. The Chicago Tribune reported that narcotics are the suspected cause of death.

Chicago Police News Affairs Officer Laura Kubiak told reporters that police are currently conducting a death investigation. An autopsy was scheduled for Sunday, according to the Tribune.

Weezer Former Bassist Mikey Welsh

Welsh performed with Weezer from 1998-2001. According to Weezer’s Website, he left the band after having a nervous breakdown and reinvented himself as a painter.

In 2002, shortly after leaving Weezer, he told the MetroWest Daily News that he felt the need to move on from music, adding that he was much happier as a painter.

“Music is still an important part of my life, but I really have no desire to actually play it,” he told the Daily News.

A tribute to Welsh on the band’s Website says, “It saddens me and the guys in Weezer so much to say that our beautiful, creative, hilarious and sweet friend Mikey Welsh has passed away at the very young age of 40. A unique talent, a deeply loving friend and father, and a great artist is gone, but we will never forget him. His chapter in the Weezer story (’98 – ’01)
was vital, essential, wild, and amazing.”

Current Weezer bassist Scott Shriner posted a note on his Twitter account saying, “Really bummed about Mikey. My heart goes out to his family and friends. Such a talent… he made a special mark on the world with his art.”

Weezer is playing at the Chicago Riot Fest Sunday, a show Welsh was expected to attend.

The post on Weezer’s site ends by saying, “Mikey was planning on attending this show and we were looking forward to seeing him again. As sad as it is to think about, we know Mikey would never want the rock stopped on his account – quite the contrary in fact. While we wont see him, we know he will be there rocking out with us!”

This is a repost from my blog on PsychCentral:

There are changes afoot in the use of opioid agonists for chronic pain treatment. This blog has described the epidemic of opioid dependence that has killed tens of thousands of people across the country over the past few years, and the changes are directed toward reducing the harm caused by this epidemic.

A number of interventions have been proposed. Vicodin, the number one-selling medication in the country, contains the opioid hydrocodone combined with acetaminophen, the agent in Tylenol. Hydrocodone and Vicodin are currently ‘Schedule III’ medications, and will likely move to Schedule II, where oxycodone, Oxycontin, and Percocet are currently assigned. The change will have significant impact on the use of Vicodin and hydrocodone, since medications classified as Schedule II must be ordered on written prescriptions—i.e. they cannot be called in to the pharmacy. There are a number of other limitations on Schedule II medications; the prescriptions cannot have refills for example, and a maximum of 90 days of medication can be ordered at any one time. The laws that govern diversion of Schedule II medications are more strict as well, meaning that trading or selling Vicodin or hydrocodone to a friend or relative will carry significant risk of prosecution—and incarceration.

There are proposals for additional certification and training for doctors who prescribe pain medications, beyond the current DEA licenses that typically allow registrants to prescribe all of the controlled substances, without distinguishing between classes or uses of medications. These proposals anger the ‘pain treatment lobby,’ whose members claim that additional certification requirements will lessen the availability of pain medications. And they are correct—that is, after all, the whole point of the proposed changes.

There are a couple issues that merit discussion that have no clear right or wrong answer—at least in my opinion. First, in the debate over additional certification, there is little argument that such changes would reduce the number of doctors who prescribe opioids. Many doctors will decide that it is not worth the hassle and cost to obtain the special certification. Some others will see the requirement as a golden opportunity to leave the pain med prescribing to others, as they will be able to tell their patients ‘I’m sorry—I’m not allowed to prescribe them’—an easy way to avoid confrontation with patients asking for pain pills who doctors consider to have borderline indications for them.

We don’t know, though, whether other doctors will see the changes as business opportunities—growth in a new specialty of ‘pain pill prescribing’ for example—and fill the void left by less-frequent prescribers. And if there is a reduction in pain medication prescribing, will the reduction affect the people who don’t really NEED pain medications—i.e. the patients with mild lumbar strain, who would do much better using a heating pad and ibuprofen, and perhaps learn to lift without bending at the waist? Or will people with severe pain that truly warrants opioid medication find it impossible to have their pain adequately treated?

People should be aware that there are very significant differences in opinion over the proper use of opioid pain medications between physicians. For years, doctors were taught that people with ‘real pain’ rarely become addicted to pain medications. I was stunned when I read a study a couple years ago that claimed that less than 10% of patient who are prescribed pain medications develop opioid dependence. My clinical experience, after working for ten years in pain treatment and for about 20 years as a physician, suggest a number at least five times higher.

More and more doctors are realizing that for most people, opioid pain medications do little to increase function. People become tolerant to whatever dose of pain medication they are taking, and with that tolerance, the pain relief goes away—unless the dose is increased, which only repeats the cycle at a higher tolerance level. Patients become slaves to their medications, developing severe withdrawal from missing even one dose. Their high tolerance makes it difficult to treat pain from surgery, or from other painful conditions that the patient may develop. Finally, there is more and more evidence for the phenomenon of ‘opioid-induced hyperalgesia’ where pain symptoms are ultimately increased by opioid pain medications.

But patients still want pain medications when they are in pain, no matter how many lectures they hear about ‘decreased function,’ hyperalgesia, or tolerance. Doctors are placed in the position of giving patients what they ask for, even if it is ultimately bad for them— or protecting patients and standing up to their anger. Standing up to patient anger is not what many doctors signed up for when they went to medical school, and goes against their desire to help people—and to be liked for helping people.

And I don’t know if any course or certificate will help doctors deal with THAT.

On May 27th, 2011, actor Jeff Conaway died from complications of opioid dependence. His death has been attributed to several causes—sepsis, pneumonia, and aspiration among them— but there is little debate over the ultimate cause of his death at the age of 60 years, that being addiction to opioid pain medications.

Mr. Conaway reportedly struggled with chronic pain and addiction to pain medications for a number of years. His situation was particularly tragic—living with severe pain that was relieved by nothing save for a substance with the power to destroy him. Such situations are, unfortunately, not uncommon.

It is easy to take the position that Mr. Conaway should have avoided pain pills; that his addiction essentially disqualified him from even considering them. I will take that attitude myself from time to time, after a series of appointments with patients who are clearly worsening their situation by using opioids for pain that appears ‘tolerable.’ But about the time I start to become confident in my position, I always seem to develop a painful condition of my own—minor sciatica, plantar fasciitis, or lumbar strain, far less severe than the condition of the patients who I have decided should ‘tolerate’ their pain. Whenever that happens I realize, very quickly, something that I had forgotten– pain hurts! Funny how easy it is to ‘tolerate’ pain that is being experienced by someone else!

Most studies that follow patients with chronic pain over periods of years show that people are more ‘functional’ if they never use opioids for chronic pain. But there is considerable debate among the medical community over this issue, with each side finding little to appreciate in the other side’s position. Through my 25 years as a physician I’ve seen the pendulum swing back, and forth, and back again over the issue of opioid treatment for nonmalignant chronic pain. At present, science suggests that opioids are grossly overprescribed. But patients who are taking pain medications for severe pain have a hard time accepting the results of those studies.

There is also considerable confusion among people with addictive disorders about the proper treatment of addiction. I read that Mr. Conaway tried to recover from addiction using methods based in Scientology, as well as ‘traditional’ treatment methods. When he appeared on ‘Celebrity Rehab’, he had every reason to trust his treatment team, and to believe that the advice that he received was sound. But was he told that the success rate for the type of treatment offered in that silly, exploitative TV show is perhaps 5%—and that the presence of TV cameras probably made the success rate even lower?

And am I the only person who finds it bizarre that the doctor behind that TV show has a new book coming out about the harmful effects of narcissism on society– a book that he wrote after building his career off putting movie cameras in the treatment sessions of people who were dying from the end-stages of fatal disease?

I watched the same guy—the doctor writing about all those darn narcissists— do family ‘sex therapy’ on another TV show, offering 15 minutes of fame for teens who would talk about the most intimate details of their young lives, again providing one more step up the career ladder for the guy who is supposedly critical of narcissism.

Wow.

That same doc who is fuzzy on narcissism has made statements about buprenorphine that have done little to clarify the science of treating addiction. He was often on record on his celebrity show stating that buprenorphine should only be used short term, because otherwise people would become ‘dependent’ on it. Those comments surprised me, as I used to think that anyone with a TV show was at least up on the literature in his supposed field of expertise—and the literature has shown quite clearly, for several years now, that opioid addicts LIVE when they are on buprenorphine, and often DIE when they are not.

I can state without reservation that every patient I have treated with buprenorphine has remained alive while taking the medication—the vast majority of them feeling entirely normal, with no side effects save for constipation—which was a problem when they were using opioid agonists as well. I tell patients on buprenorphine that I’m sorry that they need medication, but they have a fatal illness after all—and that yes, they are dependent on buprenorphine—just as diabetics are ‘dependent’ on insulin.

We will never know for certain, but I strongly suspect that had Mr. Conaway received THAT recommendation—that he had a chronic illness, and that he deserved chronic treatment with a chronic medication—then I would have had to find a different topic for this blog post.

And that would have been fine with me.

Rest in Peace, Jeff Conaway.

Over a year ago I wrote about the transdermal formulation of buprenorphine available in Europe called ‘Butrans.’  One problem with the treatment of opioid dependence using buprenorphine has been the limited dose options available;  while 2 and 8 mg sublingual tablets are fine for maintenance, they are wholly inadequate when it comes to tapering off buprenorphine.  The ‘wall’ of withdrawal symptoms that people discover as they taper past 2 mg is a product of the ceiling effect of buprenorphine– so useful on the way up, but so challenging on the way down!  At 2 mg, the level part of the dose/response curve ends, and each decrease in dose causes a drop in opiate effect and a drop in tolerance… and so an increase in (albeit temporary) misery.  Smaller doses of buprenorphine would be very useful at that point, say 2 mg of buprenorphine in a scored bar about a cm long, so that people could measure consistently-sized doses like 2 mg, 1.8 mg, 1.6 mg, and so on.  I have described a ‘liquefied taper method’ that some people have used with success, as described on the Forum, to consistently measure smaller and smaller doses for an effective taper.

Of course the remaining problem with any opiate taper is that the person must suffer through some degree of discomfort and craving, while at the same time holding a vial filled with the doses that would make things whole.  Most opioid addicts really struggle at 3 AM under those conditions!.  I’ve been excited about the newer products coming down the pipeline, including the transdermal product Butrans and also an injectable form of buprenorphine called Probuphine.  The latter in particular would be useful for tapering, as the addict could get a slowly-dissolving shot of buprenorphine and then go about life as it wears off, without having a vial of more buprenorphine on the nightstand.  I don’t know if Butrans will have any usefulness for tapering buprenorphine– if it did, such use would be ‘off-label’ as the medication is approved for treatment of pain, NOT for addiction treatment.

Here is the link to the Purdue news release: 

http://www.purduepharma.com/pressroom/news/20100701.htm

A note of follow up:  According to TMZ, a variety of medications were found in Brittany Murphy’s apartment under her name and under the name of her husband and mother.  Of course it is possible that the medications actually belonged to her husband and to her mother– but as you read in my last post, I am not surprised that opiates were included on the list.  THe medication list:  

Was her death related to dangerous medication combinations?

1.  Topamax.  Topamax is an anticonvulsant that is also used to treat migraine headaches, and sometimes prescribed as a mild ‘mood stabilizer’–  say for someone who has symptoms of bipolar disorder but who instead has borderline personality or just ‘mood swings’ that don’t quite qualify as full blown bipolar disorder.  The medication is favored by some patients, particularly women with eating disorders, because unlike more effective mood stabilizers like Depakote (valproic acid), Topamax (generic name topiramate) causes weight loss instead of weight gain.  It has the nickname ‘dopamax’ because it can reduce cognitive function to a mild extent.

2.  Methylprednisolone.  This is a steroid anti-inflammatory medication, and I have no idea why she may have been taking it, if she was at all.  It is used to treat severe asthma, rheumatoid arthritis, and a wide range of autoimmune or allergic disorders.  It will create a brief euphoria in some people, and can also cause depression, mania, and even psychosis in others.  It tends to cause significant weight gain if taken for a long period of time.

3.  Fluoxetine.  Also known as Prozac, the well-known SSRI used to treat depression and anxiety (and to a lesser extent mood symptoms and irritability related to ‘periods’ in women).  Tends to decrease appetite slightly;  there is an ‘internet fad diet’ called ‘phen-pro’ which is a combination of phentermine (one of the phen-fen drugs from the heart-damaging diet of a few years ago) with fluoxetine.  Fluoxetine and other SSRIs are generally safe medications, but fluoxetine in particular can reduce the liver’s ability to metabolize some other medications, making the other medications more potent.

4.  Klonopin.   AKA clonazepam, a long-acting benzodiazepine (meds in the Valium or Xanax family).  These medications almost always start out small and become big problems in people with addictive tendencies, as I write here in my psychiatry blog.  They are great for short-term anxiety– say for a couple weeks for a death in the family.  But the person quickly becomes tolerant to the medication and then needs to take it to feel ‘normal’, eventually needing it all the time.  Benzos turn managable anxiety into an ‘anxiety disorder’.  They are also potent respiratory depressants when combined with opiates, and are often half of the equation in the case of overdoses.  They work at brain receptors that are also affected by alcohol, making them essentially ‘brandy in pill form.’  Do yourself a favor, and just say ‘no’ to benzos.  One last thing– the way that they block ‘anxiety’ is through their action as ‘amnestics’– they block the formation of memories.  A drug called ‘versed’ is widely used for dental work or colonoscopies to block memory;  that is what clonazepam and alprazolam (Xanax) do.  You can’t worry about what you cannot remember!

5.  Carbamazepine.  Also known as Tegretol, this medication is an anticonvulsant similar to Topamax but one that is potent enough to actually work for bipolar disorder and seizure disorders.  It is also prescribed for some chronic pain conditions, including a very painful facial condition called trigeminal neuralgia.   Not particularly dangerous with opiates except for effects at the liver where it also blocks or increases the metabolism of other medications in an unpredictable fashion.  It can have other uncommon but serious side effects on blood components.

6.  Ativan.  Also known as lorazepam, this is another benzodiazepine.  Works just like clonazepam but with a shorter duration of action– the half-life of lorazepam is about 12 hours and the half-life of clonazepam is 2-3 times longer.  Again, a lousy, addictive medication that is a disaster in people with addictions.

7.  Vicoprofen.  Ibuprofen combined with the opiate hydrocodone, which is a moderate-strength narcotic.  People who take opiates long term become used to them, and have to keep taking them to avoid withdrawal– as all readers here probably know!

8.  Propranolol.  This is an old, cheap medication used to treat a number of things.  It is a ‘beta blocker’, meaning it blocks the actions of adrenaline at ‘beta receptors’ at the heart and other brain regions.  It used to be used commonly for high blood pressure, but now many better medications are available.  It is used to prevent migraines, and to block the feeling of adrenaline in a person’s body– so it will be used in prisons as a non-narcotic medication to treat panic attacks or anxiety.  It is commonly used by musicians, politicians, and public speakers to help them feel calm during presentations or public appearances.  For example it will stop that ‘rush’ in a person’s chest, stop the hands from shaking, stop the heart from racing or pounding, and reduce the husky voice some people get when nervous.

9. Biaxin.  An antibiotic also known as Clarithromycin, used to treat a wide range of bacterial infections including acne, sinus infections, bladder infections… again, an old medication with many better modern substitutes.  The use of the medication is limited by the fact that similar to many of the other medications in this list, it interacts with many other medications, making the other medications more or less potent than intended.  The medication can also cause potentially fatal heart arrhythmias, particulary in combination with STEROIDS, such as the methylprednisolone on the list.

10.  Hydrocodone.  Not needing much explanation for readers of this web site, hydrocodone is a moderate-strength opiate narcotic.  It is a component of the Vicoprofen described above.  Like all opiates, it initially works very well to relieve pain.  Some people, though, find that it ‘fits’ very well;  it makes them feel whole, loved, happy, content, warm… at least for a little while.  It works just like heroin, but has a lower potency so more hydrocodone is required– but if enough is taken the same effects will occur.  The person becomes tolerant to hydrocodone fairly quickly, resulting in withdrawal if the medication is discontinued.

All in all, the medications, if they were all taken by Brittany Murphy, would be consistent with someone being treated for migraine headaches, anxiety or panic, and a mood disorder.  Just guessing, of course… and this would NOT  be the ideal way to treat these conditions.  For example, opiates are lousy ways to treat headaches, especially long-term, probably causing far more headaches than they get rid of.  Propranolol is a relatively harmless med for anxiety (providing the person doesn’t have asthma, which propranolol would aggravate).  If the carbemazepine, fluoxetine, and topamax were being used for a mood disorder like bipolar or a personality disorder like borderline personality, then taking the steroid methylprednisolone would be a risky thing to do, as steroids can cause pretty severe mood effects.

These medications have a number of dangeroud interactions, besides the addictive dangers of several of them both alone and in combination.  For those interested in a more detailed list of the dangerous interactions, I have prepared a list of the med/ med interactions in pdf format using the interactions checker provided by epocrates.

JJ

Suboxone Talk Zone

Today I received a call from a patient who has been taking Suboxone for about six months, asking for help with a pain issue.  Before getting into the specific details I’ll mention something that I have mentioned many times before; some people do very well on Suboxone maintenance for opiate dependence, and others do less well.  Some people take their daily morning dose of Suboxone and then live life almost as non-addicts, rarely even thinking about opiates as they go about the business of life.  But others will remain in an addictive relationship with opiates.  The Suboxone bails them out of jams, or even prevents the jams from happening in the first place.  They don’t spend all of their money on oxycodone or heroin, and in most cases they will manage to avoid taking opiate agonists most of the time.  But they clearly think about opiates much more than would be ideal.   They dose Suboxone more than once per day, even while admitting that they are probably only getting a ‘placebo effect’ when they take that second dose late in the day.  Some are even worse off, taking little chunks of Suboxone at times because they think it gives them a ‘lift’ of energy or mood.  This type of behavior doesn’t necessarily end in disaster (although it sometimes does), but people stuck in this pattern don’t seem to benefit near as much as do those who dose once and forget opiate for the rest of the day.

The patient who called today wanted something ‘i.e. something narcotic’ for ‘severe throat pain that felt like a hole in his throat’—or as my kids would call it, a sore throat.  He didn’t have a diagnosis, but playing the odds he probably has a virus, or perhaps strep throat.  I’ve had strep throat many times, as have most people, including all of my kids.  I’m a pretty compassionate guy as far as my kids go, and I can’t think of a single time I considered treating their sore throats with a narcotic.  I did not provide narcotic for this patient either; doing so would have been unprofessional for multiple reasons, including the fact that he first needed to know what was using the sore throat, before simply masking the pain with narcotics.  But even after a diagnosis has been made, it is not appropriate to treat a sore throat with narcotics even in a person without addiction, let alone in a person with an addiction to opiates.

I have had a number of similar cases; people on Suboxone requesting narcotics for back pain, hand pain, carpal tunnel pain, fibromyalgia, a sore tooth, a sebaceous cyst… things that ‘normal’ people would never seek narcotics for!  I usually get into a discussion, and sometimes an argument, where I try to make the point that most people go through their entire life without taking a schedule II narcotic.  If they did have a schedule II narcotic prescribed it was almost always for severe pain from kidney stones, major surgery, or perhaps from an acute spinal disc herniation; NOT for a sore throat.

There are several issues at stake here and I’ll try to avoid getting them confused with each other.  First, people with opiate dependence who take or don’t take Suboxone must remember that they cannot control their use of opiates.  In the days before Suboxone, opiate addicts were scared to death about needing to take narcotics for surgery.  I remember cases I had as an anesthesiologist where addicts made me promise to withhold narcotics even if they begged for them during the post-op period.  I usually tried to convince those people that they simply HAD to take narcotic in some cases, as there are risks associated with untreated severe pain such as pneumonia from failure to expand the lungs after gallbladder surgery or heart attack from hypertension after abdominal aneurysm surgery.  To summarize, addicts could take their fear too far and avoid narcotics that were necessary to their surgical recovery, but the bottom line was that the smart addict avoided narcotics whenever possible, and was quick to recognize and admit the thought all addicts have after stumbling on a sidewalk crack:  ‘good- maybe I’ll break my leg and need some Percocet!’

Suboxone allows some degree of carelessness because taking Suboxone prevents a free-fall into compulsive opiate use.  But I see too much complacency, and it is important for addicts to realize that not everybody on Suboxone does well.  I have seen cases where an addict on Suboxone believes he/she is safe lightening the dose of Suboxone now and then and taking a couple ‘80s’ for a weekend of pain relief, only to end up back on oxycodone ‘full-time’, no longer able to benefit from buprenorphine. Opiate addiction is a ‘crafty MF’ to borrow a phrase.  We are lucky to have a tool to help some escape the misery of addiction.  But those who take sobriety for granted and abuse the opportunity provided by Suboxone are asking for a heap of misery, and there may be no respite the next time around.

A separate issue is whether opiate addicts DESERVE pain treatment, and I don’t want to be misunderstood on this issue because of my comments above.  There are times in life where a person may need potent schedule II narcotics to treat pain, and in these situations an opiate addict is as deserving of pain relief as any other patient.  I have seen MANY times over the years where a doctor will take note of an addict’s high opiate tolerance, and instead of prescribing a higher dose of narcotic will prescribe a lower-than-normal dose or none at all!  I have heard doctors say ‘out loud’ things like ‘I’m sick of these people, and I’m not giving him anything!’  When a person with a high opiate tolerance (often because of a carelessly- prescribing physician) goes to the local pain clinic for relief of genuine pain, the pain docs will look for a lucrative injection that can be performed, and in the absence of an injection they will look at the patient with a blank expression and say ‘I’m sorry but I can’t help you—I’m not giving you anything.’  They don’t want to do the hard work, and don’t want to take on the trouble of a person who has been damaged by other narcotic prescribers.  Why bother trying to help that person when the next guy has insurance that pays $700 for the 20 minutes of time it takes to do an epidural steroid injection?  If you have a high opiate tolerance and you are refused adequate pain treatment, you have rights.  If you are in that position, send me an e-mail and I will hook you up with a group that advocates for such patients– a group with many lawyers!

I hope that you can differentiate between the two situations described above.  There will always be a gray area between the two types of situations, but the ideas behind each of the two extremes are clearly different.  Opiate addicts learn to see every pain as deserving of treatment with narcotics regardless of whether the pain is coming from a viral cold, a migraine headache, or major surgery.  Addicts who do well are those who recognize that narcotics are rarely necessary and rarely if ever taken by non-addicts.  On the other hand, in the rare cases where narcotics are clearly indicated, addicts have as much right to pain treatment as does anyone else.

JJ