The Problem of Pain Addiction & Pain For Professionals Resources FAQs About Us
Home
Addiction & Pain
History
Managing Risks
  Types of Pain
Managing Risks

Establishing a Diagnosis for Problematic Drug-Related Behavior

The monitoring of drug-related behavior is essential throughout the course of opioid-therapy. The goals are to clarify whether any problematic behavior has occurred, and if it has, to appropriately diagnose it as a first step in management.

Most patients engage in responsible drug use over time. They adhere to the practitioner’s instructions, and regularly communicate benefits and problems. They do not substantively change therapy without prior discussion.

Some patients, however, engage in problematic drug-related behavior (also termed “aberrant drug-related behavior” and non-adherence behavior). Based on clinical experience, it is possible to describe a large number of these problematic behaviors (Table 1). Some, such as occasional unsanctioned dose escalation when symptoms flare, are probably quite common and unlikely, by themselves, to indicate a diagnosis of addiction. Others, such as injection of an oral formulation, are very serious and potentially diagnostic of addiction.

Table 1: Problematic Drug-Related Behaviors and the Likelihood that They Reflect An Underlying Addictive Disorder (.pdf)

If problematic drug-related behavior occurs, the clinician must reassess the patient, posit a diagnostic formulation, and respond in a clinically-appropriate manner. To develop a diagnostic formulation, there must be a clear understanding of the varied phenomena related to chemical dependency and the differential diagnosis they imply.

These phenomena include:

To establish a working diagnosis, this understanding of terminology must be complemented by a comprehensive assessment of the drug-related behavior. Based on this assessment, one or more of several broad diagnostic categories should be applied (Table 2). In some cases, the diagnosis is clear from a one-time evaluation of present and past behavior. In others, the complexity of the case mandates a tentative diagnosis, confirmation of which must await time to determine the response to new controls or medical interventions. If the decision is made to continue prescribing, efforts to regain adherence with the therapy must be instituted, and this must begin even if more time is required to establish a diagnosis (see Responding to Problematic Drug-Related Behavior).

Table 2: Differential Diagnosis of Problematic Drug-Related Behaviors (.pdf)

What is Tolerance?

Tolerance is a property of some drugs defined by the need for increasing doses to maintain effects, which is induced by exposure to the drug. It is a complex phenomenon that may involve both physiologic changes (known as “pharmacologic” tolerance) and learning (known as “associative” tolerance). Pharmacologic tolerance may be “pharmacokinetic” (related to drug-induced changes in drug metabolim) or pharmacodynamic (related to any number of changes that alter the concentration-response relationship of the drug). Clinically relevant tolerance to opioid effects is generally considered to be pharmacodynamic.

The mechanisms involved in the development of pharmacodynamic tolerance are complex. Recent research has elucidated a mechanism that involves the NMDA receptor and can be reversed by NMDA receptor blockers. Other processes, such as changes in second messengers unrelated to the NMDA receptor, changes in receptor number, and activation of parallel systems that are anti-analgesic, also may be involved.

Tolerance may develop to any opioid effect and both the rate of development and the degree of tolerance varies from effect to effect, and from individual to individual.
Tolerance to adverse effects is a favorable phenomenon, which allows dose escalation to levels associated with improved analgesia. Clinically relevant tolerance to analgesic effects can occur and could be a major impediment to the clinical use of opioid drugs. In the clinical setting, however, the need for dose escalation has several potential drivers, only one of which is tolerance. Progression of disease, a change in pain mechanism (e.g., a shift from a nociceptive to a neuropathic mechanism), and psychological processes that lead to increased pain all may lead to declining efficacy. This observation suggests that the need for dose escalation can be ascribed to tolerance only if an alternative explanation cannot be discerned.

Most patients who benefit from long-term opioid therapy require stable doses for prolonged periods. Dose escalations from time to time may be needed to recapture analgesia during episodes of increased pain. This observation lends credence to the clinical perception that tolerance to analgesic effects is rarely a major problem during opioid therapy for chronic pain.

Tolerance to the positive psychic effects of a self-administered drug has been postulated to be an important element in the genesis of addiction. Patients who receive opioids for pain do not commonly express significant effects of this type, and the development of tolerance to any mood effect rarely influences the course of therapy. In short, addiction can occur without evidence of tolerance and tolerance can be inferred in the clinical setting without any of the behavioral problems consistent with abuse or addiction.

References:

Nghiemphu LP, Portenoy RK: Opioid tolerance: a clinical perspective. In Bruera EB, Portenoy RK (eds): Topics in Palliative Care, vol 5. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000, pp 197-212.

What is Physical Dependence?

Physical dependence is a pharmacologic property defined solely by the occurrence of an abstinence syndrome following abrupt dose reduction, decreasing blood level of the drug, or administration of an antagonist. The dose or duration of administration required to produce clinically significant physical dependence in humans is not known. Studies suggest that very little opioid exposure—as little as a single dose—can result in some some degree of physical dependence. Most practitioners assume that the potential for an abstinence syndrome exists after opioids have been administered regularly for only a few days.

Physical dependence is not problematic as long as patients are instructed not to abruptly discontinue therapy after long-term use and no antagonist drugs are administered.

The capacity for withdrawal, i.e., physical dependence, is often confused with, or mislabeled, as “addiction.” This is a significant error that must be avoided by health care professionals. Use of the term reinforces the stigma associated with opioid therapy and should be abandoned. Likewise, referring to the patient as “dependent” should also be discouraged, since it creates confusion between physical dependence and the type of psychological dependence that is associated with addiction.

Although physical dependence is neither necessary nor sufficient for addiction, the phenomenon of physical dependence has been postulated to contribute to the spiraling of aberrant drug-use that drives the addictive process in predisposed individuals. A drug like an opioid might initially be taken to gain a psychic effect. As a result of tolerance, a higher dose is needed to regain the effect after a time, and this reinforces the frequency of dosing and the search for higher doses. After physical dependence develops, uncomfortable withdrawal occurs between doses, further driving drug craving, this time to prevent the discomfort. This process is clinically observed among those who develop opioid addiction; it appears to be rarely relevant to patients who receive opioids for medical purposes, whether or not aberrant drug use occurs.

What is Pseudoaddiction?

Pseudoaddiction refers to the development of problematic drug-related behaviors that are driven by desperation surrounding unrelieved pain. As originally coined, the term applied to the cancer population and to less serious behaviors, such as frequent requests for dose escalation. Over time, the meaning has been enlarged and it is now applied to virtually any behavior and the cardinal characteristic is decline or disappearance of the behavior when effective measures to relieve the pain (such as an increase in drug dosage) are implemented.

In ascribing more overt and potentially harmful drug-related behaviors to pseudoaddiction, there is a risk of ignoring a concurrent addiction. This is a serious concern. It is important to recognize that addiction and pseudoaddiction can coexist, and that the report of unrelieved pain does not give license to behaviors that are inappropriate or illegal. Even if the term pseudoaddiction is applied, it is necessary to gain control over behaviors that place the patient, the physician, or others at risk.

References:

Portenoy RK, Payne R, Passik S: Acute and chronic pain. In Lowinson JH, Ruiz P, Millman RB (eds): Comprehensive Textbook of Substance Abuse, Fourth Edition. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, in press.

Abuse, Addiction and Dependence

Variation in the definitions of the terms “abuse,” “addiction” and “dependence” has contributed to diagnostic confusion. The clinician who is monitoring drug-related behavior over time must have a clear understanding of these terms.

According to one definition, the term “drug abuse” should apply to the use of any drug that is outside of accepted norms. Although it is true that normative behavior reflects culture and is not constant, this definition has utility in the clinical setting. It labels any use of an illicit drug and any misuse of a prescribed drug as abuse.

The American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual-4th revision (DSM-IV) offers a more clinical definition, designating substance abuse as one of two Psychoactive Substance Use Disorders and linking it with “Psychoactive Substance Dependence,” a term intended to denote addiction. Substance abuse is defined as a maladaptive pattern of drug use that results in harm or places the individual at risk.

The DSM-IV definition of Psychoactive Substance Dependence is defined as a maladaptive pattern of drug use that persists at least one month and includes at least three of nine criteria. Although the criteria include descriptions of craving, compulsive use and use despite harm (which could be used to establish the diagnosis in the absence of any other criteria), they also refer to tolerance and physical dependence. This inclusion of tolerance and physical dependence also characterizes older definitions of “addiction” developed by expert committees of the World Health Organization.

All of the latter definitions have been criticized by pain specialists, who have been particularly disturbed by any reference to tolerance and physical dependence, both of which may be normal biological responses when opioids are used to treat pain. To address this criticism, a joint Task Force of the American Academy of Pain Medicine, the American Pain Society, and the American Society of Addiction Medicine created consensus definitions. Addiction is:

"a primary, chronic, neurobiologic disease, with genetic, psychosocial, and environmental factors influencing its development and manifestations. It is characterized by behaviors that include one or more of the following: impaired control over drug use, compulsive use, continued use despite harm, and craving."

References:

American Pain Society. Definitions related to the use of opioids for the treatment of pain: A consensus document from the American Academy of Pain Medicine, the American Pain Society, and the American Society of Addiction Medicine. ©1996-2003. Accessed online October 29, 2003. http://www.ampainsoc.org/advocacy/opioids2

Kirsch KL, Whitcomb LA, Donaghy K, Passik SD. Abuse and addiction issues in medically ill patients with pain: attempts at clarification of terms and empirical study. Clin J Pain 2002;18:S52-S60.

Portenoy RK, Payne R, Passik S: Acute and chronic pain. In Lowinson JH, Ruiz P, Millman RB (eds): Comprehensive Textbook of Substance Abuse, Fourth Edition. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, in press.

Savage SR, Joranson DE, Covington EC, Schnoll SH, Heit HA, Gilson AM. Definitions related to the medical use of opioids: evolution towards universal agreement. J Pain Symptom Manage 2003;26:655-667.



 

Home | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Disclaimer | Site Map
This website is funded by your generous support. Care to Donate?
©2005-2011 Continuum Health Partners, Inc.



Home Print This Page Visit Stoppain.org Visit other Stoppain.org sites