Virginia Regulatory Town Hall
Agency
Department of Health Professions
 
Board
Board of Medicine
 
chapter
Regulations Governing Prescribing of Opioids and Buprenorphine [18 VAC 85 ‑ 21]
Action Initial regulations
Stage Emergency/NOIRA
Comment Period Ended on 10/18/2017
spacer
Previous Comment     Back to List of Comments
10/16/17  11:30 am
Commenter: William O'Keefe

supplemental comments on opioid regulation
 

I am writing to provide supplemental comments concerning the Board’s Opioid regulation.  After reviewing more of the literature, I am even more puzzled about the justification for the current regulation, especially including Class 4 opioids like Tramadol, that is overly broad and too rigid.  I believe that empirical data justify a revision that at a minimum would be tiered, provide flexibility to physicians, and make the Prescription Management System a more effective management tool.

The National Survey on Drug Use found that the nonmedical use of prescription opioids peaked in 2012 while opioid overdose deaths continued to increase.  Professor Chinazo Cunningham, a recognized expert from the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, has reached the same conclusion. It appears that the view of most experts is that deaths are being caused by the use of illegal drugs.  The data also show that more people have died from heroin overdoses than from prescription overdoes. 

A 2014 study by the Journal of the American Medical Association found that just 13% of overdose patients were people on opioids for chronic pain.  A comprehensive review by the Cochrane Library found that the addiction rate for people on prescriptions was only 1%. 

Disturbingly, the CDC has reported that some people who take opioids for pain and who are cut off by their doctors turn to the illegal drug market as an alternative.  This strongly suggests that the Board’s regulation could be counterproductive because some people who must comply with quarterly visits to their doctor along with six month urine tests could turn to riskier alternatives as being less burdensome and costly.

The above conclusions were also confirmed in a health commentary this summer by Robert DuPont the first director of the National Institute of Drug Abuse and William Bennett the nation’s first drug czar.  They wrote, “70 percent of our nation’s opioid deaths do not come via prescription abuse. …  The main problem today, and the growth for tomorrow, is illegal opioids such as heroin, illegal fentanyl, and a hundred other synthetics, not legal drugs used illegally or in ways not as prescribed.”  In 2015, there were 33,000 opioid overdose deaths with heroin deaths constituting almost 13,000 and synthetic opioids (mostly illegal fentanyl) another 9,600 deaths.

 

 

As the Board’s staff reviews the additional comments that are filed, I urge you direct them to also review the literature.  It should lead to a conclusion that the current regulation needs to be revised because it will, at best, only have a marginal effect on overdosing while placing an unnecessary burden on doctors for complieance as well as patients who take opioids for chronic pain management.

Increasing the cost (which includes the imposed burden) of complying with the regulation for pain management patients as well as physicians, while most likely reducing effectiveness is compelling evidence of a need for revision.  The goal of any regulation should be the highest practical level possible with the lowest practical cost.  The current regulation does not do this.

William O'Keefe

5450 Brickshire Drive

Providence Forge, Va 23140

804-966-7370

CommentID: 63021