PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Ronald J Kulich

Publications and source records attributed to Ronald J Kulich.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

Successful and unsuccessful outcomes with long-term opioid therapy: a survey of physicians' opinions.

BACKGROUND: The attitudes, beliefs, and experience of physicians will influence how they view the use of opioids for chronic nonterminal pain. OBJECTIVE: To survey pain specialists and primary care providers (PCPs) to obtain their opinion and attitude on aberrant drug-taking behaviors. DESIGN: We surveyed three physician groups, mailing 250 surveys followed by two followups. The survey consisted of (1) questions about beliefs in the effectiveness of long-term opioid therapy and successful and unsuccessful outcomes and (2) a ratings section for possible indicators of unsuccessful long-term opioid treatment. RESULTS: In total 147 questionnaires (82 PCPs, 65 pain specialists) were returned. Pain specialists reported a greater number of patients undergoing long-term opioid therapy compared to nonpain specialists. Opinion regarding the effectiveness of long-term opioid therapy among all physicians was mixed but there was no significant difference between pain specialists and PCPs. There was agreement among physicians with regard to highly aberrant behaviors being indicators of failed long-term opioid therapy. The ratings of the following indicators showed differences between each group: no improvement in pain control, not being able to return to work, and a deterioration in relationships with others. Physicians reported increases or decreases in function to be the most important successful or unsuccessful outcome, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary survey showed consensus among physicians that highly aberrant behaviors indicate a failure of chronic opioid therapy. However, when considering less egregious behaviors, it would appear a physician's experience and the number of patients they had taking opioids influenced their opinion.

Analgesics, Opioid↗

A survey of medico-legal practice patterns among pain specialists.

OBJECTIVE: Pain clinicians are increasingly asked to provide expert commentary in a variety of medico-legal or forensic contexts. The purpose of this study was to discover the frequency and type of medico-legal activity undertaken by pain specialists, their familiarity with current guidelines, and their opinions with respect to a need for formal ethical or practice guidelines. DESIGN: Members of the New England Pain Association were surveyed with a 20-item questionnaire addressing specific areas of practice including the completion of disability forms, letters/attorney reports, depositions, testimony in court, record reviews, and return-to-work forms. Respondents also were asked to distinguish medico-legal activities for their patients from those that occurred for third parties. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Participants included pain specialists from a range of disciplines represented by the membership of a regional pain society. The response rate was 67%, with a total of 144 returned surveys. RESULTS: Survey data revealed that 72% of pain specialists had engaged in some form of medico-legal work within the past year. Of those who engaged in this work, 96% completed this work as a treating clinician for their patients. While the majority of respondents engaged in activities such as the completion of disability forms, other high frequency activities included depositions and testimony. Differences between physicians and nonphysicians also were noted. Results revealed that the majority of pain specialists supported the development of guidelines for medico-legal practice. It was suggested that pain societies move to develop ethical and/or clinical practice guidelines to address this issue.

Data Collection↗