Choosing the unit of measurement counts: The use of oral morphine equivalents in studies of opioid consumption is a useful addition to defined daily doses

Abstract

Aim: Defined daily dose (DDD) is the most common measurement unit used in drug consumption studies. The DDD for opioids may not reflect their relative clinical potencies. The aim of this study was to explore whether opioid consumption data may be interpreted differently when adding oral morphine equivalent (OMEQ) dose as a measurement unit compared with using DDD.

Methods: The equianalgesic ratio of each opioid relative to morphine was tabulated. Data on opioid consumption expressed in DDD were converted to OMEQs using the equianalgesic ratios. The opioid consumption was compared in three different study settings: clinical data from an opioid switching study, trends within one country and a comparison between countries.

Results: Using DDD, the opioid consumption in Norway between 2004–2008 increased of 6.7%, while the increase was 23.6% using OMEQ. While DDD/1000 inhabitants/day showed that Sweden had the highest consumption of opioids among the Nordic countries, OMEQ/1000 inhabitants/day showed that Denmark had the highest consumption. In the switching study DDD indicated a reduction in analgesic dosing and OMEQ an increase when switching from WHO step II to III.

Conclusion: OMEQ reflects clinical dosing better than DDD, and can give additional insight into opioid consumption when combined with DDD. Using OMEQ can also lead to different conclusions in opioid consumption studies compared with using DDD alone.

Keywords

Analgesics drug utilization opioid pharmacoepidemiology

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Fredheim

Skurtveit

Breivik

. Increasing use of opioids from 2004 to 2007 – Pharmacoepidemiological data from a complete national prescription database in Norway. Eur J Pain 2009; 14: 289–294.

Hamunen

Paakkari

Kalso

. Trends in opioid consumption in the Nordic countries 2002–2006. Eur J Pain 2009; 13: 954–962.

Boudreau

Von Korff

Rutter

. Trends in long-term opioid therapy for chronic non-cancer pain. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2009; 18: 1166–1175.

International Narcotics Control Board. Annual Report: Narcotic Drugs. 2009. http://www.incb.org/pdf/technical-reports/narcotic-drugs/2009/Narcotic_drugs_publication_2009.pdf (accessed October 2010).

Hamunen

Laitinen-Parkkonen

Paakkari

. What do different databases tell about the use of opioids in seven European countries in 2002? Eur J Pain 2008; 12: 705–715.

WHO Collaborating Centre for Drug Statistics Methodology. Guidelines for ATC classification and DDD assignment 2010, 13th ed. WHO, 2010.

De Conno

Ripamonti

Brunelli

. Opioid purchases and expenditure in nine western European countries: ‘Are we killing off morphine? Palliat Med 2005; 19: 179–184.

Garcia del Pozo

Carvajal

Viloria

. Trends in the consumption of opioid analgesics in Spain. Higher increases as fentanyl replaces morphine. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2008; 64: 411–415.

Hudec

Tisoňová

Božeková

. Trends in consumption of opioid analgesics in Slovak Republic during 1998–2002. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2004; 60: 445–448.

10.

Dale

Klepstad

Kaasa

. The European Union – not united in opioid use. Palliat Med 2005; 19: 177–178.

11.

Jarlbaek

Andersen

Hallas

. Use of opioids in a Danish population-based cohort of cancer patients. J Pain Symptom Manage 2005; 29: 336–343.

12.

Curry

Palla

Hung

. Prescribing patterns and purchasing costs of long-acting opioids over nine years at an academic oncology hospital. Am J Health Syst Pharm 2007; 64: 1619–1625.

13.

Clausen

Eriksen

Borgbjerg

. Legal opioid consumption in Denmark 1981–1993. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1995; 48: 321–325.

14.

Fredheim

OMS

Moksnes

Borchgrevink

. Clinical pharmacology of methadone for pain. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2008; 52: 879–889.

15.

Norwegian Medicines Agency. Summary of product characteristics, Ketorax. http://www.legemiddelverket.no/custom/Preparatsok/prepSearch____80333.aspx (accessed 13 October 2009).

16.

Norwegian Medicines Agency. Summary of product characteristics, Actiq. http://www.legemiddelverket.no/custom/Preparatsok/prepSearch____80333.aspx (accessed 13 October 2009).

17.

Klepstad

Borchgrevink

Kaasa

. Effects on cancer patients’ health-related quality of life after the start of morphine therapy. J Pain Symptom Manage 2000; 20: 19–26.

18.

World Health Organization. Cancer pain relief. Geneva: WHO, 1986.

19.

Back

. Palliative Medicine Handbook, http://book.pallcare.info/index.php?tid=125 (accessed January 2009).

20.

Souter

Fitzgibbon

. Equianalgesic dose guidelines for long-term opioid use: Theoretical and practical considerations. Semin Anesth 2004; 23: 271–280.

21.

MacAuley

. Narcotic analgesic converter. http://www.globalrph.com/narcotic.cgi . (accessed January 2009).

22.

Wall

Melzack

McMahon

. Wall and Melzack’s Textbook of Pain. Philadelphia: Elsevier Churchill Livingstone, 2006.

23.

Sittl

Likar

Nautrup

. Equipotent doses of transdermal fentanyl and transdermal buprenorphine in patients with cancer and noncancer pain: Results of a retrospective cohort study. Clin Ther 2005; 27: 225–237.

24.

Patanwala

Duby

Waters

. Opioid conversions in acute care. Ann Pharmacother 2007; 41: 255–266.

25.

Divvela

Williams

Meives

. Opioid analgesics: Comparison of pharmacokinetics and equianalgesic doses. Hosp Pharm 2006; 42: 1130–1135.

26.

Anderson

Saiers

Abram

. Accuracy in equianalgesic dosing. conversion dilemmas. J Pain Symptom Manage 2001; 21: 397–406.

27.

Ohqvist

Hallin

Gelinder

. A comparison between morphine, meperidine and ketobemidone in continuous intravenous infusion for postoperative relief. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 1991; 35: 44–48.