Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy 1/2018

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Review

Pain clinic definitions in the medical literature and U.S. state laws: an integrative systematic review and comparison

Authors: Barbara Andraka-Christou, Joshua B. Rager, Brittany Brown-Podgorski, Ross D. Silverman, Dennis P. Watson

Published in: Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

In response to widespread opioid misuse, ten U.S. states have implemented regulations for facilities that primarily manage and treat chronic pain, called “pain clinics.” Whether a clinic falls into a state’s pain clinic definition determines the extent to which it is subject to oversight. It is unclear whether state pain clinic definitions model those found in the medical literature, and potential differences lead to discrepancies between scientific and professionally guided advice found in the medical literature and actual pain clinic practice. Identifying discrepancies could assist states to design laws that are more compatible with best practices suggested in the medical literature.

Methods

We conducted an integrative systematic review to create a taxonomy of pain clinic definitions using academic medical literature. We then identified existing U.S. state pain clinic statutes and regulations and compared the developed taxonomy using a content analysis approach to understand the extent to which medical literature definitions are reflected in state policy.

Results

In the medical literature, we identified eight categories of pain clinic definitions: 1) patient case mix; 2) single-modality treatment; 3) multidisciplinary treatment; 4) interdisciplinary treatment; 5) provider supervision; 6) provider composition; 7) marketing; and 8) outcome. We identified ten states with pain clinic laws. State laws primarily include the following definitional categories: patient case mix; single-modality treatment, and marketing. Some definitional categories commonly found in the medical literature, such as multidisciplinary treatment and interdisciplinary treatment, rarely appear in state law definitions.

Conclusions

This is the first study to our knowledge to develop a taxonomy of pain clinic definitions and to identify differences between pain clinic definitions in U.S. state law and medical literature. Future work should explore the impact of different legal pain clinic definitions on provider decision-making and state-level health outcomes.
Footnotes
1
The literature on pain clinic definitions very much stems from these papers which were published in 1990 and 1991. Early searches which did not include these time parameters yielded few useful results, although a paper published before this date (Bonica 1977) was added to our final analysis based on expert input. Also, no state pain clinic regulations preceded the date of these seminal papers.
 
2
PDFs that were not readily available at our institution were submitted to our interlibrary loan service. Several of these came back as irretrievable from library staff while several others were simply not retrieved without notification from staff. Often these articles are irretrievable if they cannot be located in English, although the source is originally identified as English. Additionally, given that our search included “grey” literature, we expected some irregularities in the search and retrieval process of that literature.
 
3
We excluded state regulations of individual providers who treat chronic pain from review of pain clinic laws, as the two types of laws differ in scope and content. Additionally, some states regulate individual prescribers but not pain clinics. Regulations of individual providers focus on prescribers of opioids for chronic pain. These regulations capture a very broad swath of providers, as they are applicable any time a provider prescribes opioids for chronic pain, regardless provider specialty. On the other hand, pain clinic regulations are much narrower, typically only applying to entities that market themselves as treating pain, that frequently prescribe controlled substances for pain, or that have a majority of patients treated for pain. Second, the content of state regulations of individual providers differs from that of pain clinic regulations. Pain clinic regulations require separate registration for pain clinics without which the pain clinic cannot legally operate, improving state oversight of such clinics and subjecting clinics to state inspection. Regulations detail management and structure of the business, rather than or in addition to treatment practices for pain management. In contrast, regulations of individual providers do not require practitioners to register with the state, nor do they subject practitioners to inspection. They focus almost exclusively on how to provide pain management treatment with narcotics, detailing maximum opioid dosage, number of days per prescription, required consultations with specialists, and/or required physical examinations. Such laws are far more common than laws specifically regulating pain clinics.
 
4
As used in this paper, the term “safe harbor law” has two meanings. First, it refers to any state law provision that explicitly exempts certain pain clinics from regulations, even though these clinics fall within the definition of “pain clinic.” For example, a state law exempting pain clinics associated with hospitals from regulations is a safe harbor law. Second, “safe harbor law” also refers to state law provisions that explicitly exclude certain types of clinics from the definition of “pain clinic.” For example, a state law explicitly exempting addiction treatment clinics from the definition of pain clinics is a safe harbor law.
 
Literature
2.
go back to reference Muhuri P, Gfroerer J, Davies M. Associations of nonmedical pain reliever use and initiation of heroin use in the United States: CBHSQ Quarterly Review. Rockville: 2013. Muhuri P, Gfroerer J, Davies M. Associations of nonmedical pain reliever use and initiation of heroin use in the United States: CBHSQ Quarterly Review. Rockville: 2013.
3.
go back to reference Compton W, Jones C, Baldwin G. Relationship between nonmedical prescription-opioid use and heroin use. NEJM. 2016;374:154–63.CrossRefPubMed Compton W, Jones C, Baldwin G. Relationship between nonmedical prescription-opioid use and heroin use. NEJM. 2016;374:154–63.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC]. Wide-ranging online data for epidemiologic research (WONDER). Atlanta: CDC, National Center for Health Statistics; 2016. Available at http://wonder.cdc.gov. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC]. Wide-ranging online data for epidemiologic research (WONDER). Atlanta: CDC, National Center for Health Statistics; 2016. Available at http://​wonder.​cdc.​gov.
9.
go back to reference Dowell D, Zhang K, Noonan RK, Hockenberry JM. Mandatory provider review and pain clinic laws reduce the amounts of opioids prescribed and overdose death rates. Health Aff. 2016;35:1876–83.CrossRef Dowell D, Zhang K, Noonan RK, Hockenberry JM. Mandatory provider review and pain clinic laws reduce the amounts of opioids prescribed and overdose death rates. Health Aff. 2016;35:1876–83.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Brownson RC, Royer C, Ewing R, McBride TD. Researchers and policymakers: Travelers in parallel universes. Am J Prev Med. 2006;30:164–72.CrossRefPubMed Brownson RC, Royer C, Ewing R, McBride TD. Researchers and policymakers: Travelers in parallel universes. Am J Prev Med. 2006;30:164–72.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Brownson RC, Gurney JG, Land GH. Evidence-based decision making in public health. J Public Health Manage Pract. 1999;5:86–97.CrossRef Brownson RC, Gurney JG, Land GH. Evidence-based decision making in public health. J Public Health Manage Pract. 1999;5:86–97.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference MAXQDA. Software for qualitative data analysis, 1989–2017. Berlin: VERBI Software – Consult- Sozialforschung GmbH. MAXQDA. Software for qualitative data analysis, 1989–2017. Berlin: VERBI Software – Consult- Sozialforschung GmbH.
14.
go back to reference Russell CL. An overview of the integrative research review. Prog Transplant. 2005;15(1):8-13. Russell CL. An overview of the integrative research review. Prog Transplant. 2005;15(1):8-13.
16.
go back to reference Loeser J. Desirable characteristics for pain treatment facilities: report of the IASP taskforce. In: Bond MR, Woolf CJ, editors. Proceedings of the VIth world congress on pain: Elsevier science publishers BV; 1991. p. 411–5. Loeser J. Desirable characteristics for pain treatment facilities: report of the IASP taskforce. In: Bond MR, Woolf CJ, editors. Proceedings of the VIth world congress on pain: Elsevier science publishers BV; 1991. p. 411–5.
17.
go back to reference JCD WELLS, JB MILES. Pain clinics and pain clinic treatments. Br Med Bull. 1991;47:762–85.CrossRef JCD WELLS, JB MILES. Pain clinics and pain clinic treatments. Br Med Bull. 1991;47:762–85.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference EndNote, reference management software. Clarivate analytics. Philadelphia; 2017. EndNote, reference management software. Clarivate analytics. Philadelphia; 2017.
21.
go back to reference Kuckartz U. Qualitative text analysis: a guide to methods, practice, and using software. London: SAGE Publications Ltd; 2014.CrossRef Kuckartz U. Qualitative text analysis: a guide to methods, practice, and using software. London: SAGE Publications Ltd; 2014.CrossRef
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
go back to reference KY. REV. STAT ANN. § 218A.175 (eff. 2015). KY. REV. STAT ANN. § 218A.175 (eff. 2015).
28.
go back to reference LA. REV. STAT. ANN. § 40:2198.12 (eff. 2014). LA. REV. STAT. ANN. § 40:2198.12 (eff. 2014).
29.
go back to reference LA. REV. STAT. ANN. § 40:2198.11 (eff. 2006). LA. REV. STAT. ANN. § 40:2198.11 (eff. 2006).
30.
31.
go back to reference 30-17 MISS. Code r. § 2640:1.2(G) (eff. 2012). 30-17 MISS. Code r. § 2640:1.2(G) (eff. 2012).
32.
go back to reference OHIO REV. Code ANN. § 4731.054 (eff. 2013). OHIO REV. Code ANN. § 4731.054 (eff. 2013).
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
47.
go back to reference de Meij N, van Grotel M, Patijn J, van der Weijden T, van Kleef M. First Dutch Consensus of Pain Quality Indicators for Pain Treatment Facilities. Pain Pract. 2016;16(1):57–66. de Meij N, van Grotel M, Patijn J, van der Weijden T, van Kleef M. First Dutch Consensus of Pain Quality Indicators for Pain Treatment Facilities. Pain Pract. 2016;16(1):57–66.
48.
go back to reference LA. REV. STAT. ANN. § 40:2198.12(E)(5) (eff. 2014). LA. REV. STAT. ANN. § 40:2198.12(E)(5) (eff. 2014).
50.
go back to reference FLA. STAT. ANN. § 459.0137(1)(a)(2)(h) (eff. 2016). FLA. STAT. ANN. § 459.0137(1)(a)(2)(h) (eff. 2016).
51.
go back to reference TENN. Code ANN. § 63–1-302(4) (eff. 2017). TENN. Code ANN. § 63–1-302(4) (eff. 2017).
52.
go back to reference LA. REV. STAT. ANN. § 40:2198.12(E)(1) (eff. 2014). LA. REV. STAT. ANN. § 40:2198.12(E)(1) (eff. 2014).
53.
go back to reference Jay G. Interdisciplinary Treatment of Chronic Noncancer Pain. In: Clinician’s Guide to Chronic Headache and Facial Pain. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2016. Jay G. Interdisciplinary Treatment of Chronic Noncancer Pain. In: Clinician’s Guide to Chronic Headache and Facial Pain. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2016.
54.
go back to reference GA. Code ANN. § 43–34-282(7) (eff. 2013). GA. Code ANN. § 43–34-282(7) (eff. 2013).
56.
go back to reference TEX OCC. Code ANN. § 168.002(8) (eff. 2014). TEX OCC. Code ANN. § 168.002(8) (eff. 2014).
57.
go back to reference OHIO ADMIN. CODE 4731–29-01(A)(7)(g) (eff. 2017). OHIO ADMIN. CODE 4731–29-01(A)(7)(g) (eff. 2017).
58.
go back to reference Peng P, Choiniere M, Dion D, Intrater H, Lefort S, Lynch M, Ong M, Rashiq S, Tkachuk GVY, Peng P, Choiniere M, Dion D, Intrater H, Lefort S, et al. Challenges in accessing multidisciplinary pain treatment facilities in Canada. Can J Anaesth. 2007;54:977–84.CrossRefPubMed Peng P, Choiniere M, Dion D, Intrater H, Lefort S, Lynch M, Ong M, Rashiq S, Tkachuk GVY, Peng P, Choiniere M, Dion D, Intrater H, Lefort S, et al. Challenges in accessing multidisciplinary pain treatment facilities in Canada. Can J Anaesth. 2007;54:977–84.CrossRefPubMed
59.
go back to reference FLA. STAT. ANN. § 459.0137(1)(a)(1)(c) (eff. 2016). FLA. STAT. ANN. § 459.0137(1)(a)(1)(c) (eff. 2016).
60.
go back to reference TENN. COMP. R. & REGS. 1200–34-01-.05(1). TENN. COMP. R. & REGS. 1200–34-01-.05(1).
61.
go back to reference Wells JC, Miles JB. Pain clinics and pain clinic treatments. Br Med Bull. 1991;47(3):762–85. Wells JC, Miles JB. Pain clinics and pain clinic treatments. Br Med Bull. 1991;47(3):762–85.
64.
go back to reference Peng P, Stinson J, Choiniere M, Dion D, Intrater H, LeFort S, et al. Dedicated multidisciplinary pain management centres for children in Canada: the current status. Can J Anaesth. 2007;54(12):985-91. Peng P, Stinson J, Choiniere M, Dion D, Intrater H, LeFort S, et al. Dedicated multidisciplinary pain management centres for children in Canada: the current status. Can J Anaesth. 2007;54(12):985-91.
68.
go back to reference Commission on Accreditation of Rehabilitation Facilities. (2017). Medical Rehabilitation Program Descriptions. Commission on Accreditation of Rehabilitation Facilities. (2017). Medical Rehabilitation Program Descriptions.
69.
go back to reference Vasudevan SV, Lynch NT. Pain centers-organization and outcome. Rehabil Med. 1991;154:532–5. Vasudevan SV, Lynch NT. Pain centers-organization and outcome. Rehabil Med. 1991;154:532–5.
73.
go back to reference Morley-Forster PK. Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow:wait times for multidisciplinary pain clinics in Canada. Can J Anesth. 2007;54:963–8.CrossRefPubMed Morley-Forster PK. Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow:wait times for multidisciplinary pain clinics in Canada. Can J Anesth. 2007;54:963–8.CrossRefPubMed
74.
go back to reference Peng P, Stinson J, Choiniere M, Dion D, Intrater H, Lefort S, et al. Role of health care professionals in multidisciplinary pain treatment facilities in Canada. Pain Res Manag. 2008;13(6):484–8 Peng P, Stinson J, Choiniere M, Dion D, Intrater H, Lefort S, et al. Role of health care professionals in multidisciplinary pain treatment facilities in Canada. Pain Res Manag. 2008;13(6):484–8
Metadata
Title
Pain clinic definitions in the medical literature and U.S. state laws: an integrative systematic review and comparison
Authors
Barbara Andraka-Christou
Joshua B. Rager
Brittany Brown-Podgorski
Ross D. Silverman
Dennis P. Watson
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 1747-597X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13011-018-0153-6

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy 1/2018 Go to the issue