Adam M. Kaye

Bio: Adam M. Kaye is an academic researcher from University of the Pacific (United States). The author has contributed to research in topics: Medicine & Chronic pain. The author has an hindex of 17, co-authored 77 publications receiving 2371 citations. Previous affiliations of Adam M. Kaye include Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center & Louisiana State University.

Benzodiazepine Pharmacology and Central Nervous System–Mediated Effects

Abstract: Background Owing to the low therapeutic index of barbiturates, benzodiazepines (BZDs) became popular in this country and worldwide many decades ago for a wide range of conditions. Because of an increased understanding of pharmacology and physiology, the mechanisms of action of many BZDs are now largely understood, and BZDs of varying potency and duration of action have been developed and marketed. Although BZDs have many therapeutic roles and BZD-mediated effects are typically well tolerated in the general population, side effects and toxicity can result in morbidity and mortality for some patients. The elderly; certain subpopulations of patients with lung, liver, or kidney dysfunction; and patients on other classes of medication are especially prone to toxicity. Methods This review details the present knowledge about BZD mechanisms of action, drug profiles, clinical actions, and potential side effects. In addition, this review describes numerous types of BZD-mediated central nervous system effects. Conclusion For any patient taking a BZD, the prescribing physician must carefully evaluate the risks and benefits, and higher-risk patients require careful considerations. Clinically appropriate use of BZDs requires prudence and the understanding of pharmacology.

American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP) Guidelines for Responsible Opioid Prescribing in Chronic Non-Cancer Pain: Part 2 - Guidance

Abstract: RESULTS: Part 2 of the guidelines on responsible opioid prescribing provides the following recommendations for initiating and maintaining chronic opioid therapy of 90 days or longer. 1. A) Comprehensive assessment and documentation is recommended before initiating opioid therapy, including documentation of comprehensive history, general medical condition, psychosocial history, psychiatric status, and substance use history. (Evidence: good) B) Despite limited evidence for reliability and accuracy, screening for opioid use is recommended, as it will identify opioid abusers and reduce opioid abuse. (Evidence: limited) C) Prescription monitoring programs must be implemented, as they provide data on patterns of prescription usage, reduce prescription drug abuse or doctor shopping. (Evidence: good to fair) D) Urine drug testing (UDT) must be implemented from initiation along with subsequent adherence monitoring to decrease prescription drug abuse or illicit drug use when patients are in chronic pain management therapy. (Evidence: good) 2. A) Establish appropriate physical diagnosis and psychological diagnosis if available prior to initiating opioid therapy. (Evidence: good) B) Caution must be exercised in ordering various imaging and other evaluations, interpretation and communication with the patient, to avoid increased fear, activity restriction, requests for increased opioids, and maladaptive behaviors. (Evidence: good) C) Stratify patients into one of the 3 risk categories - low, medium, or high risk. D) A pain management consultation, may assist non-pain physicians, if high-dose opioid therapy is utilized. (Evidence: fair) 3. Essential to establish medical necessity prior to initiation or maintenance of opioid therapy. (Evidence: good) 4. Establish treatment goals of opioid therapy with regard to pain relief and improvement in function. (Evidence: good) 5. A) Long-acting opioids in high doses are recommended only in specific circumstances with severe intractable pain that is not amenable to short-acting or moderate doses of long-acting opioids, as there is no significant difference between long-acting and short-acting opioids for their effectiveness or adverse effects. (Evidence: fair) B) The relative and absolute contraindications to opioid use in chronic non-cancer pain must be evaluated including respiratory instability, acute psychiatric instability, uncontrolled suicide risk, active or history of alcohol or substance abuse, confirmed allergy to opioid agents, coadministration of drugs capable of inducing life-limiting drug interaction, concomitant use of benzodiazepines, active diversion of controlled substances, and concomitant use of heavy doses of central nervous system depressants. (Evidence: fair to limited) 6. A robust agreement which is followed by all parties is essential in initiating and maintaining opioid therapy as such agreements reduce overuse, misuse, abuse, and diversion. (Evidence: fair) 7. A) Once medical necessity is established, opioid therapy may be initiated with low doses and short-acting drugs with appropriate monitoring to provide effective relief and avoid side effects. (Evidence: fair for short-term effectiveness, limited for long-term effectiveness) B) Up to 40 mg of morphine equivalent is considered as low dose, 41 to 90 mg of morphine equivalent as a moderate dose, and greater than 91 mg of morphine equivalence as high dose. (Evidence: fair) C) In reference to long-acting opioids, titration must be carried out with caution and overdose and misuse must be avoided. (Evidence: good) 8. A) Methadone is recommended for use in late stages after failure of other opioid therapy and only by clinicians with specific training in the risks and uses. (Evidence: limited) B) Monitoring recommendation for methadone prescription is that an electrocardiogram should be obtained prior to initiation, at 30 days and yearly thereafter. (Evidence: fair) 9. In order to reduce prescription drug abuse and doctor shopping, adherence monitoring by UDT and PMDPs provide evidence that is essential to the identification of those patients who are non-compliant or abusing prescription drugs or illicit drugs. (Evidence: fair) 10. Constipation must be closely monitored and a bowel regimen be initiated as soon as deemed necessary. (Evidence: good) 11. Chronic opioid therapy may be continued, with continuous adherence monitoring, in well-selected populations, in conjunction with or after failure of other modalities of treatments with improvement in physical and functional status and minimal adverse effects. (Evidence: fair) DISCLAIMER: The guidelines are based on the best available evidence and do not constitute inflexible treatment recommendations. Due to the changing body of evidence, this document is not intended to be a "standard of care." Language: en

Responsible, Safe, and Effective Prescription of Opioids for Chronic Non-Cancer Pain: American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP) Guidelines.

Abstract: Background Opioid use, abuse, and adverse consequences, including death, have escalated at an alarming rate since the 1990s. In an attempt to control opioid abuse, numerous regulations and guidelines for responsible opioid prescribing have been developed by various organizations. However, the US opioid epidemic is continuing and drug dose deaths tripled during 1999 to 2015. Recent data show a continuing increase in deaths due to natural and semisynthetic opioids, a decline in methadone deaths, and an explosive increase in the rates of deaths involving other opioids, specifically heroin and illicit synthetic fentanyl. Contrary to scientific evidence of efficacy and negative recommendations, a significant proportion of physicians and patients (92%) believe that opioids reduce pain and a smaller proportion (57%) report better quality of life. In preparation of the current guidelines, we have focused on the means to reduce the abuse and diversion of opioids without jeopardizing access for those patients suffering from non-cancer pain who have an appropriate medical indication for opioid use. Objectives To provide guidance for the prescription of opioids for the management of chronic non-cancer pain, to develop a consistent philosophy among the many diverse groups with an interest in opioid use as to how appropriately prescribe opioids, to improve the treatment of chronic non-cancer pain and to reduce the likelihood of drug abuse and diversion. These guidelines are intended to provide a systematic and standardized approach to this complex and difficult arena of practice, while recognizing that every clinical situation is unique. Methods The methodology utilized included the development of objectives and key questions. The methodology also utilized trustworthy standards, appropriate disclosures of conflicts of interest, as well as a panel of experts from various specialties and groups. The literature pertaining to opioid use, abuse, effectiveness, and adverse consequences was reviewed, with a best evidence synthesis of the available literature, and utilized grading for recommendation as described by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ).Summary of Recommendations:i. Initial Steps of Opioid Therapy 1. Comprehensive assessment and documentation. (Evidence: Level I; Strength of Recommendation: Strong) 2. Screening for opioid abuse to identify opioid abusers. (Evidence: Level II-III; Strength of Recommendation: Moderate) 3. Utilization of prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs). (Evidence: Level I-II; Strength of Recommendation: Moderate to strong) 4. Utilization of urine drug testing (UDT). (Evidence: Level II; Strength of Recommendation: Moderate) 5. Establish appropriate physical diagnosis and psychological diagnosis if available. (Evidence: Level I; Strength of Recommendation: Strong) 6. Consider appropriate imaging, physical diagnosis, and psychological status to collaborate with subjective complaints. (Evidence: Level III; Strength of Recommendation: Moderate) 7. Establish medical necessity based on average moderate to severe (≥ 4 on a scale of 0 - 10) pain and/or disability. (Evidence: Level II; Strength of Recommendation: Moderate) 8. Stratify patients based on risk. (Evidence: Level I-II; Strength of Recommendation: Moderate) 9. Establish treatment goals of opioid therapy with regard to pain relief and improvement in function. (Evidence: Level I-II; Strength of Recommendation: Moderate) 10. Obtain a robust opioid agreement, which is followed by all parties. (Evidence: Level III; Strength of Recommendation: Moderate)ii. Assessment of Effectiveness of Long-Term Opioid Therapy 11. Initiate opioid therapy with low dose, short-acting drugs, with appropriate monitoring. (Evidence: Level II; Strength of Recommendation: Moderate) 12. Consider up to 40 morphine milligram equivalent (MME) as low dose, 41 to 90 MME as a moderate dose, and greater than 91 MME as high dose. (Evidence: Level II; Strength of Recommendation: Moderate) 13. Avoid long-acting opioids for the initiation of opioid therapy. (Evidence: Level I; Strength of Recommendation: Strong) 14. Recommend methadone only for use after failure of other opioid therapy and only by clinicians with specific training in its risks and uses, within FDA recommended doses. (Evidence: Level I; Strength of Recommendation: Strong) 15. Understand and educate the patients of the effectiveness and adverse consequences. (Evidence: Level I; Strength of Recommendation: Strong) 16. Similar effectiveness for long-acting and short-acting opioids with increased adverse consequences of long-acting opioids. (Evidence: Level I-II; Strength of recommendation: Moderate to strong) 17. Periodically assess pain relief and/or functional status improvement of ≥ 30% without adverse consequences. (Evidence: Level II; Strength of recommendation: Moderate) 18. Recommend long-acting or high dose opioids only in specific circumstances with severe intractable pain. (Evidence: Level I; Strength of Recommendation: Strong)iii. Monitoring for Adherence and Side Effects 19. Monitor for adherence, abuse, and noncompliance by UDT and PDMPs. (Evidence: Level I-II; Strength of Recommendation: Moderate to strong) 20. Monitor patients on methadone with an electrocardiogram periodically. (Evidence: Level I; Strength of Recommendation: Strong). 21. Monitor for side effects including constipation and manage them appropriately, including discontinuation of opioids when indicated. (Evidence: Level I; Strength of Recommendation: Strong)iv. Final Phase 22. May continue with monitoring with continued medical necessity, with appropriate outcomes. (Evidence: Level I-II; Strength of Recommendation: Moderate) 23. Discontinue opioid therapy for lack of response, adverse consequences, and abuse with rehabilitation. (Evidence: Level III; Strength of Recommendation: Moderate) CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines were developed based on comprehensive review of the literature, consensus among the panelists, in consonance with patient preferences, shared decision-making, and practice patterns with limited evidence, based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to improve pain and function in chronic non-cancer pain on a long-term basis. Consequently, chronic opioid therapy should be provided only to patients with proven medical necessity and stability with improvement in pain and function, independently or in conjunction with other modalities of treatments in low doses with appropriate adherence monitoring and understanding of adverse events.Key words: Chronic pain, persistent pain, non-cancer pain, controlled substances, substance abuse, prescription drug abuse, dependency, opioids, prescription monitoring, drug testing, adherence monitoring, diversionDisclaimer: The guidelines are based on the best available evidence and do not constitute inflexible treatment recommendations. Due to the changing body of evidence, this document is not intended to be a "standard of care."

Rhabdomyolysis: Pathogenesis, Diagnosis, and Treatment

Abstract: Background: Rhabdomyolysis is a complex medical condition involving the rapid dissolution of damaged or injured skeletal muscle. Methods: This review focuses on the epidemiology, pathophysiology, causes, presentation, diagnosis, complications, management, and anesthetic considerations related to rhabdomyolysis. Results: Any form of muscle damage––and by extension any entity that causes muscle damage––can initiate rhabdomyolysis. One of the most important treatment goals when rhabdomyolysis is suspected is avoiding acute kidney injury. Conclusion: All clinicians should be aware of common causes, diagnosis, and treatment options.

Tramadol, Pharmacology, Side Effects, and Serotonin Syndrome: A Review.

Abstract: Background Serotonin syndrome is a mild to potentially life-threatening syndrome associated with excessive serotonergic activity within the central nervous system. Serotonin syndrome is associated with medication use, drug interactions, and overdose. While serotonin syndrome is often associated with the use of selective serotonin inhibitors (SSRI), an increasing number of reports are being presented involving the use of tramadol. Methods This review article contains an overview of serotonin syndrome while specifically looking at tramadol's pharmacology and risk factors for serotonin syndrome. With tramadol's increasing popularity, the goal of this article is to make physicians more alert and aware of this potential side effect associated with tramadol. Conclusions In conclusion, with the increasing incidence of serotonin syndrome, prescribing physicians should be aware of and educate their patients on the potential side effects of tramadol. It is important that the prescribing physician reviews patient medications for concurrent serotonergic drugs and monitors for potential abuse.

European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps 2020

Abstract: The European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps 2020 is the update of similar evidence based position papers published in 2005 and 2007 and 2012. The core objective of the EPOS2020 guideline is to provide revised, up-to-date and clear evidence-based recommendations and integrated care pathways in ARS and CRS. EPOS2020 provides an update on the literature published and studies undertaken in the eight years since the EPOS2012 position paper was published and addresses areas not extensively covered in EPOS2012 such as paediatric CRS and sinus surgery. EPOS2020 also involves new stakeholders, including pharmacists and patients, and addresses new target users who have become more involved in the management and treatment of rhinosinusitis since the publication of the last EPOS document, including pharmacists, nurses, specialised care givers and indeed patients themselves, who employ increasing self-management of their condition using over the counter treatments. The document provides suggestions for future research in this area and offers updated guidance for definitions and outcome measurements in research in different settings. EPOS2020 contains chapters on definitions and classification where we have defined a large number of terms and indicated preferred terms. A new classification of CRS into primary and secondary CRS and further division into localized and diffuse disease, based on anatomic distribution is proposed. There are extensive chapters on epidemiology and predisposing factors, inflammatory mechanisms, (differential) diagnosis of facial pain, allergic rhinitis, genetics, cystic fibrosis, aspirin exacerbated respiratory disease, immunodeficiencies, allergic fungal rhinosinusitis and the relationship between upper and lower airways. The chapters on paediatric acute and chronic rhinosinusitis are totally rewritten. All available evidence for the management of acute rhinosinusitis and chronic rhinosinusitis with or without nasal polyps in adults and children is systematically reviewed and integrated care pathways based on the evidence are proposed. Despite considerable increases in the amount of quality publications in recent years, a large number of practical clinical questions remain. It was agreed that the best way to address these was to conduct a Delphi exercise . The results have been integrated into the respective sections. Last but not least, advice for patients and pharmacists and a new list of research needs are included. The full document can be downloaded for free on the website of this journal: http://www.rhinologyjournal.com.

MDS Clinical Diagnostic Criteria for Parkinson's Disease (S19.001)

Abstract: Objective To present the International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society (MDS) Clinical Diagnostic Criteria for Parkinson9s disease. Background Although several diagnostic criteria for Parkinson9s disease have been proposed, none have been officially adopted by an official Parkinson society. Moreover, the commonest-used criteria, the UK brain bank, were created more than 25 years ago. In recognition of the lack of standard criteria, the MDS initiated a task force to design new diagnostic criteria for clinical Parkinson9s disease. Methods/Results The MDS-PD Criteria are intended for use in clinical research, but may also be used to guide clinical diagnosis. The benchmark is expert clinical diagnosis; the criteria aim to systematize the diagnostic process, to make it reproducible across centers and applicable by clinicians with less expertise. Although motor abnormalities remain central, there is increasing recognition of non-motor manifestations; these are incorporated into both the current criteria and particularly into separate criteria for prodromal PD. Similar to previous criteria, the MDS-PD Criteria retain motor parkinsonism as the core disease feature, defined as bradykinesia plus rest tremor and/or rigidity. Explicit instructions for defining these cardinal features are included. After documentation of parkinsonism, determination of PD as the cause of parkinsonism relies upon three categories of diagnostic features; absolute exclusion criteria (which rule out PD), red flags (which must be counterbalanced by additional supportive criteria to allow diagnosis of PD), and supportive criteria (positive features that increase confidence of PD diagnosis). Two levels of certainty are delineated: Clinically-established PD (maximizing specificity at the expense of reduced sensitivity), and Probable PD (which balances sensitivity and specificity). Conclusion The MDS criteria retain elements proven valuable in previous criteria and omit aspects that are no longer justified, thereby encapsulating diagnosis according to current knowledge. As understanding of PD expands, criteria will need continuous revision to accommodate these advances. Disclosure: Dr. Postuma has received personal compensation for activities with Roche Diagnostics Corporation and Biotie Therapies. Dr. Berg has received research support from Michael J. Fox Foundation, the Bundesministerium fur Bildung und Forschung (BMBF), the German Parkinson Association and Novartis GmbH.

Postoperative Multimodal Analgesia Pain Management With Nonopioid Analgesics and Techniques: A Review.

Abstract: Importance Amid the current opioid epidemic in the United States, the enhanced recovery after surgery pathway (ERAS) has emerged as one of the best strategies to improve the value and quality of surgical care and has been increasingly adopted for a broad range of complex surgical procedures. The goal of this article was to outline important components of opioid-sparing analgesic regimens. Observations Regional analgesia, acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents, gabapentinoids, tramadol, lidocaine, and/or theN-methyl-d-aspartate class of glutamate receptor antagonists have been shown to be effective adjuncts to narcotic analgesia. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents are not associated with an increase in postoperative bleeding. A meta-analysis of 27 randomized clinical trials found no difference in postoperative bleeding between the groups taking ketorolac tromethamine (33 of 1304 patients [2.5%]) and the control groups (21 of 1010 [2.1%]) (odds ratio [OR], 1.1; 95% CI, 0.61-2.06;P = .72). After adoption of the multimodal analgesia approach for a colorectal ERAS pathway, most patients used less opioids while in the hospital and many did not need opioids after hospital discharge, although approximately 50% of patients received some opioid during their stay. Conclusions and Relevance Multimodal analgesia is readily available and the evidence is strong to support its efficacy. Surgeons should use this effective approach for patients both using and not using the ERAS pathway to reduce opioid consumption.

Guideline for opioid therapy and chronic noncancer pain

Abstract: Chronic noncancer pain includes any painful condition that persists for at least three months and is not associated with malignant disease.[1][1] According to seven national surveys conducted between 1994 and 2008, 15%–19% of Canadian adults live with chronic noncancer pain.[2][2] Chronic