A comparison of methods of administering the Opioid Risk Tool

Ted Jones, PhD; Steven D. Passik, PhD

doi:10.5055/jom.2011.0075

Authors

Ted Jones, PhD
Steven D. Passik, PhD

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5055/jom.2011.0075

Keywords:

Opioid Risk Tool, risk assessment, medication aberrant behavior

Abstract

Risk assessment and stratification have become important aspects for the prescription of opioids to patients with chronic pain. Recent research has shown that the Opioid Risk Tool (ORT), a widely used risk assessment tool, has poor predictive abilities when compared with other risk assessment methods. This study compares two different methods of administration of the ORT to further study this issue. Patients at a pain practice were given an ORT to complete per the usual method of administration. In addition, a separate blinded ORT was completed by a psychologist after conducting a clinical interview with the patient. The results of the patient-completed ORT (PC-ORT) and the clinician-completed ORT (CC-ORT) were compared. There were significant differences found between the two, with the psychologist usually rating the patient higher in risk. The CC-ORT demonstrated better prediction of aberrant drug-taking behavior than the PC-ORT. The items that were discrepant between the two suggest that the differences were primarily due to comprehension issues. A strategy to help maximize the usefulness of the ORT derived from this finding and clinical experience is discussed.

Author Biographies

Ted Jones, PhD

Behavioral Medicine Institute at Pain Consultants of East Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee.

Steven D. Passik, PhD

Associate Attending Psychologist, Memorial-Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York.

References

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: Prevalence of disabilities and associated health conditions among adults: United States, 1999. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2001; 50: 120-125.

Leider HL: Chronic opioid adherence and health care costs in a managed care population. In American Academy of Pain Medicine Conference. Glenview, IL: American Academy of Pain Medicine, 2010: Abstract 216.

Joranson DE, Gilson AM, Dahl JL, et al.: Pain management, controlled substances, and state medical board policy: A decade of change. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2002; 23: 138-147.

Compton WM, Volkow ND: Major increases in opioid analgesic abuse in the United States: Concerns and strategies. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2006; 81(2): 103-107.

Chou R, Fanciullo GJ, Fine PG, et al.: Clinical guidelines for the use of chronic opioid therapy in chronic noncancer pain. J Pain. 2009; 10(2): 113-130.

Passik SD, Kirsh KL, Casper D: Addiction-related assessment tools and pain management: Instruments for screening, treatment planning, and monitoring compliance. Pain Med. 2008; 9(2): S145-S166.

Turk DC, Swanson KS, Gatchel RJ: Predicting opioid misuse by chronic pain patients: A systematic review and literature synthesis. Clin J Pain. 2008; 24(6): 497-508.

Moore TM, Jones T, Browder JH, et al.: A comparison of common screening methods for predicting aberrant drug-related behavior among patients receiving opioids for chronic pain management. Pain Med. 2009; 10(8): 1426-1433.

Jones T, Moore TM, Levy J, et al.: A comparison of various risk screening methods for patients receiving opioids for chronic pain management. Poster presentation at the PAINWeek 2010, Las Vegas, NV, September 9, 2010.

Webster LR, Webster RM: Predicting aberrant behaviors in opioid-treated patients: Preliminary validation of the Opioid Risk Tool. Pain Med. 2005; 5(6): 432-442.