Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Opioids are a commonly administered analgesic medication in the intensive care unit, primarily to facilitate invasive mechanical ventilation. Consensus guidelines advocate for an opioid-first strategy for the management of acute pain in ventilated patients. As a result, these patients are potentially exposed to high opioid doses for prolonged periods, increasing the risk of adverse effects. Adverse effects relevant to these critically ill patients include delirium, intensive care unit–acquired infections, acute opioid tolerance, iatrogenic withdrawal syndrome, opioid-induced hyperalgesia, persistent opioid use, and chronic post–intensive care unit pain. Consequently, there is a challenge of optimising analgesia while minimising these adverse effects. This narrative review will discuss the characteristics of opioid use in the intensive care unit, outline the potential short-term and long-term adverse effects of opioid therapy in critically ill patients, and outline a multifaceted strategy for opioid minimisation.

Keywords

Anaesthesia intensive care pharmacological considerations sedation and analgesia pain chronic pharmacology opioid critical care

Introduction

Opioids are one of the most common medications administered to critically ill patients. In the intensive care unit (ICU), nearly 80% of mechanically ventilated patients receive opioids.^1,2 The predominant indication for their use is the treatment of acute pain or discomfort. The mechanisms underlying the causes of acute pain (Table 1) are complex and synergistic and include the admission diagnosis to the ICU (e.g. sepsis, trauma, burns, surgery), procedures to facilitate supportive therapy (e.g. the presence of an endotracheal tube, urinary catheter, prolonged immobility), excess medications (e.g. opioids, sedatives) and procedures such as turning for pressure area care, suctioning and vascular access.^3,4 Potential psychosocial causes of acute pain include delirium, sleep deprivation, fear, social isolation, depression, anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder.^4,5

Table 1.

Factors inducing or exacerbating acute pain in the intensive care unit.

Biological	Underlying illness (e.g. surgery, sepsis, trauma, burns)
	Iatrogenic interventions (e.g. endotracheal tube, repositioning, drains)
	Complications (e.g. nosocomial infections)
	Prolonged immobility
	Inappropriate pain management (lack of multimodal analgesia, acute opioid tolerance, opioid-induced hyperalgesia)
	Pharmacotherapy (sedation type)
	Pre-existing chronic pain
Psychological	Fear
	Hallucinations
	Post-traumatic stress disorder
	Sleep deprivation
	Delirium
	Anxiety
	Depression
Social	Isolation
	Rejection
	Facing own mortality

Adapted from Schug et al.⁶⁸

Acute pain is common in critically ill patients,⁶ with 80% of critically ill patients reporting moderate to severe pain at some point in their ICU admission, and attributing it to a source of long-term psychological morbidity.⁷ Approximately half of both medical and surgical ICU patients report moderate to severe pain at rest.⁸ Treatment of acute pain within the ICU can lead to improved outcomes and decreased length of ICU stay, while inadequate analgesia can lead to chronic physical and psychological morbidity.⁹ The importance of pain management in critically ill patients is highlighted by consensus guidelines,¹⁰ which recommend an analgesia-first analgesic regimen. Opioids are recommended as the first-line analgesic for non-neuropathic pain in ventilated patients.

Despite the clear benefit of opioids in facilitating invasive therapies, prolonged infusions of opioids, as is common in patients receiving mechanical ventilation, can be harmful. Prolonged duration of opioid therapy may lead to short-term adverse effects such as delirium, acute opioid tolerance, opioid-induced hyperalgesia, immunosuppression with an increased risk of ICU-acquired infection, iatrogenic withdrawal syndrome on abrupt cessation, and long-term effects such as persistent opioid use and their potential role in the development of chronic pain in survivors of the ICU.

The objectives of this narrative review are to discuss the characteristics of opioid use in the ICU and outline the potential short-term and long-term adverse effects of opioid therapy in the general, adult critically ill population. In addition, we provide an opioid minimisation framework to assist intensive care clinicians in the management of opioids and pain in critically ill patients. Discussions relating to the pain management of the patient receiving chronic opioid therapy and opioid use in ICU subspecialties (e.g. burns, spinal cord injury) are outside the scope of this review and are reviewed elsewhere.^11
–13

Characteristics of opioid use in the intensive care unit

Type of opioid

Over the past two decades, there has been a shift in the predominant opioid used for analgesia in ventilated ICU patients. Initially, morphine was favoured over synthetic opioids such as fentanyl, sufentanil, alfentanil and remifentanil.^14
–16 Over time, however, fentanyl has become more popular than the other opioids.^17
–22 The reasons for this have not been extensively investigated, but perceived favourable pharmacokinetics, lack of accumulation of active metabolites in end-organ dysfunction, and reduced incidence of adverse events such as nausea and vomiting, urinary retention and constipation¹⁹ are likely to play a role in prescription decision-making.

There also exists regional variation in the type of opioid prescribed. The predominant opioids used in ICUs in Australia and New Zealand for analgesia are morphine and fentanyl,²³ with ventilated patients receiving fentanyl (80%), morphine (30%) and alfentanil (7.6%).²¹ In France, 40% of patients received sufentanil, 25% received fentanyl and 20% received morphine.¹⁷ In a survey of European ICUs, morphine was preferred over fentanyl and sufentanil in Norway, the UK, Ireland, Sweden, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Spain and Portugal. In contrast, fentanyl was preferred in France, Germany and Italy.^14,24 Although this survey was 20 years ago and preferences may have changed, it highlights the regional variation in practice.

There is a lack of comparative effectiveness trials comparing opioids used for analgesia in the ICU. Casamento et al.²⁵ compared infusions of fentanyl to morphine in ventilated patients and found that patients receiving fentanyl had more ventilator-free days and a shorter ICU length of stay. A major limitation of this study is that opioid infusions were titrated using local protocols targeting light sedation. The targeting of sedation, rather than pain, make extrapolation of opioid type for analgesia difficult as higher doses may be required to achieve sedation.

The remaining studies compared remifentanil to fentanyl,^26,27 morphine^27,28 and sufentanil.²⁹ Compared with morphine and sufentanil, remifentanil resulted in a decreased duration of mechanical ventilation and more time in range of a target sedation score. Compared to morphine and fentanyl in patients admitted to the ICU with acute neurological injuries, remifentanil use resulted in a shorter time to neurological assessment. In addition, patients receiving remifentanil had a decreased time to extubation compared to those receiving morphine, but not fentanyl.²⁷ In a study comparing remifentanil to fentanyl, there was no difference in the time to liberation from mechanical ventilation. For patients who experienced pain, those treated with remifentanil had a longer duration of pain during extubation, post-extubation and post-treatment of pain.²⁶ An explanation of this observed effect is the increased risk of opioid-induced hyperalgesia (OIH) and rapid opioid tolerance seen with remifentanil.³⁰ In an otherwise pharmacokinetically ideal opioid, the potential for tolerance and OIH has potentially limited its widespread use.

It is unsurprising that there is a lack of evidence informing opioid use in ventilated patients. There is a large variation in practice, determined by differing clinical objectives, patient characteristics such as admission diagnosis and end-organ dysfunction, and an increasing choice of available opioids. Added to this is the misconception of ‘analgosedation’, in which opioids are used primarily as sedatives. Given opioids are analgesics, sedation in an opioid should be viewed as an adverse effect, not a primary effect. Also, the required opioid dose to achieve sedation would be likely to be higher than that required as an analgesic. In addition, there may be a misunderstanding of the appropriate opioid conversion factors, resulting in relative underdosing which may make comparison of opioids difficult.

Dose of opioid

One of the potential outcomes of an opioid-first approach to analgesia in ventilated patients is an increased cumulative dose of opioids. It is evident that small hourly doses of continuous infusion opioid may result in large daily cumulative opioid doses. In studies performed in France by Payen and colleagues,^17,22,31 the fentanyl doses titrated against validated pain scores were 40–50 μg/kg/day (560–700 mg/day oral morphine equivalent daily dose (oMEDD) in a 70 kg person). Cumulative doses of morphine, however, were not of this magnitude, with a mean dose of 0.4–0.5 mg/kg/day (84–105 mg oMEDD in a 70 kg person). This may be due to the lower analgesic efficacy of fentanyl compared to morphine, or the accumulation of active metabolites of morphine. This high cumulative fentanyl dose was observed in other studies.^21,32,33 More recently, however, the daily dose of fentanyl in ventilated patients receiving an opioid was 148.5 mg oMEDD.³⁴ Further studies are needed to determine whether lower opioid doses are more prevalent since the release of recent guidelines¹⁰ advocating the lowest possible dose of opioid to achieve adequate analgesia.

There are conflicting results in studies investigating opioid doses over time. In a study comparing morphine and fentanyl in ventilated patients, the mean daily dose of both fentanyl and morphine remained constant over a period of seven days.²⁵ It should be noted that the opioid was titrated against a target of light sedation, so extrapolating these results to analgesic endpoints should be undertaken cautiously. However, this may reflect what is occurring at the bedside. This constant dose of opioid administration was also seen in a study in which the cumulative daily fentanyl dose was 500 mg oMEDD on day two and 600 mg oMEDD on day ten.³² However, Burry et al.¹⁸ found an increase in daily opioid doses over time in ventilated patients, with 23 mg oMEDD (<48 hours), 63 mg oMEDD (two to seven days) and 106 mg oMEDD (>seven days). The predominant opioid in that study was morphine.

As previously mentioned, the comparison of opioids and potential misconceptions about opioid conversion factors in the setting of end-organ dysfunction make inference from these studies on opioid dosage difficult. Nevertheless, the above studies are concerning for the following reasons. First, these high opioid doses are administered for a prolonged period to a patient cohort, in which at least 80% of ventilated patients are opioid naive.¹ Second, there appears to be a disconnect between opioid dose and pain, particularly over time. Longitudinal analysis of acute pain in general ICU patients shows a decrease in pain at rest but a relatively constant proportion of pain while turning.³⁵ Hence, it is concerning that although pain is decreasing over time, opioid doses are remaining constant or increasing, essentially resulting in a relative opioid overdose. Given that opioids are frequently given with sedation, it is plausible that the titration of opioids does not occur for analgesia alone, but also for sedation, essentially increasing the dose. It was not noted in the above studies whether opioid infusions were titrated to pain scores. The combination of inappropriately high opioid dosing, for prolonged periods in opioid-naive patients renders the critically ill patient at an increased risk of both short- and long-term adverse effects of opioids.

Short-term adverse effects of opioids in the intensive care unit

The potential short-term adverse effects of opioid therapy in the ICU include delirium, acute opioid tolerance and withdrawal, opioid-induced hyperalgesia, immunosuppression, gastrointestinal disturbance, and psychological or cognitive impairment. While these side-effects are identical to opioid therapy outside of the ICU, the effects may be exaggerated due to exposure to a higher opioid dose for prolonged periods, end-organ dysfunction, and concomitant critical illness.

Delirium

Delirium, or acute brain dysfunction, is a common ICU complication that affects 50%–75% of ICU patients. Pain and opioid use are two potential causal factors for the development of delirium.^36
–39 Given the pathophysiology of ICU delirium is complex, it is unsurprising that there is no clear role of opioids in its development. While numerous studies confer a positive association between opioid use in the ICU and ICU delirium,^{36,37,39
–41} several other studies have found no association.^38,42,43 However, it is plausible that both opioid dose and type may play a role in the development of delirium in the ICU.

Early studies looking at potential causal factors for developing ICU delirium identified a non-linear relationship between opioid dose and delirium. Dubois et al.⁴¹ found an inverse U-shaped relationship between daily opioid dose and the risk of developing delirium. The dose range of daily opioid exposure that was associated with the highest risk of developing delirium (odds ratio (OR) 9.2) was 21.6–55.8 mg oMEDD, with a decreasing risk of delirium on either side of that range. Pain is a potential causal factor for developing delirium, and appropriate analgesia in the lower daily dose range is possibly an explanation for a decreased incidence of delirium in those patients. In addition, a higher opioid dose is likely to be used in patients who have a high acuity of illness, which increases the likelihood of developing delirium. Also, a higher dose of opioid is likely to be used in patients who are more deeply sedated, which may mask the diagnosis of delirium.⁴² This reflects a non-causative role of opioid use and delirium, in which sedatives, and the co-administration of opioids, are being used to manage delirium. It should be noted that that study did not differentiate between opioid and benzodiazepine use, which is an additional potential causal factor for developing ICU delirium.^40,41 Another possibility is the differential effect of sedatives on pain perception. In a study by Frölich et al.,⁴⁴ the use of midazolam for procedural sedation resulted in higher pain perception compared with propofol and dexmedetomidine. It is plausible that this may translate to the ICU, where an increase in pain perception may induce agitation and delirium.

It is feasible that different opioids result in a different risk of developing delirium. In surgical and trauma patients, morphine had a lower risk of delirium in both groups.³⁷ Multivariable analysis adjusting for sedative medications, but not pain scores, showed that in ventilated surgical ICU patients, the use of fentanyl was associated with a four times increased risk of developing delirium. This was in contrast to morphine, which had a 60% decreased risk. This morphine effect was also seen in trauma patients, with a nearly 80% reduced risk of developing ICU delirium. In that study, patients receiving morphine had a lower proportion of time with delirium. The observed effect may be due to the analgesic efficacy of morphine or its metabolites compared to fentanyl, particularly in a group that may experience increased neuropathic or somatic pain compared to general ICU patients.

One other potential factor in explaining the inconsistent reported effects of opioids on delirium is the adjustment of pain as a potential confounder. Ventilated patients are usually receiving an opioid, which is a potential risk factor for delirium. The presence of the endotracheal tube is known to cause moderate to severe pain for the ICU patient,^7,45,46 and pain is a potential causal factor of delirium.⁴² Hence, acute pain is a confounder in the causal pathway from opioid exposure to delirium.

When acute pain, defined as an average pain score or worst pain score, was adjusted for, opioid exposure was associated with 2.5 times the risk of developing delirium in an elderly ICU cohort.³⁹ Interestingly, neither average pain score nor worst pain score was associated with the development of delirium. Duprey et al.⁴⁷ determined the transitional probability of developing next-day delirium, adjusting for severe pain, in ventilated ICU patients. The administration of opioids was associated with an increased risk of developing delirium the next day (OR 1.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.24 to 1.69), with an increase in the risk of 2.4% for each daily 30 mg oMEDD administered. In addition, the risk of developing delirium was greater for synthetic opioids such as fentanyl and remifentanil (OR 1.77) compared to morphine (OR 1.09). Interestingly, in that study severe pain was inversely associated with transitioning to delirium (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.97), when adjusting for opioid use. This may be explained by the definition of severe acute pain in which pain only needed to have occurred once in the previous 24 hours, when the administration of appropriate opioid analgesia preventing delirium gave the fallacy of pain being protective.

One major limitation of studies investigating the role of opioids in the development of delirium is the concept of time-varying exposure and confounding. As can be seen in Figure 1, the causal pathway from opioid exposure at time (t₀) to delirium is complex. Pain at t₀ is a confounder for opioid exposure and delirium. There is potential for the opioid exposure to exacerbate acute pain at a point in the future (pain t₁) through opioid-induced hyperalgesia or latent sensitisation. Pain at t₁ is a confounder for opioid exposure at t₁ and delirium, and is also potentially causal for future pain at t_n. Hence, acute pain is acting as both a confounder and a mediator in the causal pathway of opioid exposure to delirium. It is evident that the use of a single cumulative variable for ICU admission (e.g. one episode of severe pain or total opioid dose) can result in biased estimates of effect. In addition, opioid exposure (i.e. opioid dose) may also change over time and this needs to be accounted for in the analysis.

Figure 1.

Causal diagram of opioid dose and the development of delirium. The directed acyclic graph (DAG) details the causal pathway from the time-varying exposure (opioid) to the outcome (delirium), with pain as a time-varying confounder. t₀: time at baseline; t₁: time at timepoint 1; t_n: time at timepoint n.

The causal pathways from opioid exposure to the development of delirium are complex, reflecting the multitude of causes of ICU delirium and the time-varying nature of both exposures and confounders. Opioids most likely play a role in the development of delirium, but the specifics of opioid type, opioid dose, confounding by pain, sedative medications and admission diagnosis need to be evaluated further. Further studies should focus on time-varying exposure and confounding, utilising accepted causal inference methodology to ensure unbiased effect estimates and appropriate inferences can be made about the role of opioids in the development of delirium.

Intensive care unit-acquired infection

Infection is a common occurrence in patients in the ICU. The European Prevalence of Infection in Intensive Care (EPIC) III point prevalence study reported 54% of patients had a suspected or confirmed infection, including 22% with ICU-acquired infection.⁴⁸ The most common site of infection was the respiratory tract (61%), followed by abdominal (16%) and bloodstream (15%).⁴⁸ Patients who develop a nosocomial infection in the ICU are associated with the development of multi-organ dysfunction, have a longer ICU and hospital length of stay, and an increased risk of in-hospital mortality.^48
–51

There are several mechanisms by which opioids may increase the risk of developing an ICU-acquired infection. These include immunosuppression, increased sedation resulting in increased duration of mechanical ventilation and microaspiration, and gastrointestinal motility dysfunction.

Immunosuppression

There is a substantial body of literature detailing the effects of opioids on both the innate and adaptive immune system.^{49,50,52
–55} Opioids may affect immune function with acute exposure, chronic exposure or during acute opioid withdrawal.

Acute exposure to morphine suppresses mitogen-stimulated proliferation of T- and B-cell lymphocytes, natural killer (NK) cell cytotoxic activity, primary antibody production, macrocyte phagocytosis, and interleukin-2, interferon-γ (IFN-γ), tumour necrosis factor α and nitric oxide production.⁵⁰ Many of these effects are inhibited by naloxone, suggesting that the effects are mediated primarily through mu-opioid receptors. Mu-opioid receptors are present on leukocytes, which is suggestive of a direct effect on immune function.^50,53 Indirect effects may occur centrally, mediated through central opioid receptors, which activate the sympathetic nervous system and the hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axis. This activation increases the production of catecholamines and neuropeptides from sympathetic nerves and glucocorticoids from the adrenal glands, resulting in immunomodulation.^50,53

The cellular effects of chronic exposure to opioids on immune function are conflicting in animal studies, and are prone to potential confounding in human studies. It is currently unknown whether chronic opioid use results in a return to baseline in immune function, or whether the acute effects continue. Animal models of chronic morphine administration demonstrated altered lipopolysaccharide-induced inflammation, with rapid progression to septic shock and increased HIV viral replication.^50,53 However, there is a possibility of immune tolerance in the presence of chronic morphine use, in which lymphocyte proliferation, suppression of NK cell activity and hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axis activation return to baseline after as early as 96 hours after morphine exposure,⁵⁰ although this is not a consistent finding.^50,53 Human studies investigating the effects on infections in patients with opioid addiction are confounded by the route of administration (e.g. intravenous drug use, which can predispose to soft tissue, vascular and cardiac infections), and effects of the opioid (e.g. due to sedation, increasing the risk of respiratory tract and musculoskeletal infections).⁵³ Hence, in an uncontrolled clinical environment, it is difficult to ascertain the cellular mechanisms of immunosuppression in humans who are chronically exposed to opioids. It is also unclear if acute tolerance of opioids in ventilated patients results in the same cellular mechanisms seen in chronic opioid exposure.

Acute opioid withdrawal has been shown in animal models to result in immunosuppression, through increased levels of corticosterone, suppression of lymphocytes and T-cell proliferation, and decreased IFN-γ production and NK cell activation. These changes were seen up to 72 hours after the abrupt withdrawal of chronically administered morphine, before returning to baseline levels.⁵⁰ Given that clonidine ameliorated some of these effects, it is hypothesised that a potential pathway for withdrawal-mediated immunosuppression includes activation of the sympathetic nervous system and the hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axis. Attempts to study opioid withdrawal on ICU-acquired infections are plagued by diagnostic uncertainty of opioid withdrawal syndrome and methodological limitations. In a retrospective cohort study in mechanically ventilated patients, remifentanil discontinuation was associated with a 2.5 times increased risk of ICU-acquired infection, after adjustment for mechanical ventilation and Simplified Acute Physiology Score.⁵⁴ Although the inference of causality is tenuous at best, it is worthy of consideration as opioid withdrawal may be a more common potential causal factor for the development of ICU-acquired infection than previously realised.

Given that the ventilated ICU patient may receive opioids acutely or chronically and opioid withdrawal may occur, the effects of opioids on immunosuppression may predispose the patient to an increased risk of nosocomial infection.

Prolonged duration of ventilation

The addition of opioids to sedative medications can result in an increase in the level of sedation and a prolonged duration of ventilation.⁵⁵ The level of sedation is a potential causal factor for the development of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). One potential explanation for this relationship is microaspiration.^49,50,55 Oral pooling of secretions may be exaggerated by a reduction in oesophageal propulsion in the presence of sedation.^50,55 Contaminated oropharyngeal secretions may enter the lower respiratory tract through leakage around the endotracheal tube cuff, allowing bacterial seeding into the lower respiratory tract. The increased duration of mechanical ventilation prolongs the exposure to these potential causal factors for developing nosocomial infections (particularly VAP). However, the precise role of opioid dose or type resulting in prolonging ventilation and the effect on nosocomial infection requires further evaluation.

Gastrointestinal dysfunction

Gastrointestinal (GI) dysfunction is common in critically ill patients and the effects of opioids on the GI system are well documented. Mechanisms by which opioids can cause GI dysfunction, resulting in an increased risk of ICU-acquired infection, include alteration of the structural barrier and functional gut microbiome (dysbiosis) and GI motility dysfunction.⁵⁶ The gut microbiome is an integral component of the GI barrier to infection. Administration of opioids can reduce microbial diversity, resulting in an increase in the proportion of potential pathogenic bacteria, such as Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Enterococcus faecalis, Listeria monocytogenes, Citrobacter rodentium, Clostridium difficile, Streptococcaceae and Staphylococcaceae.^56
–58 In animal models, the effects of opioid-induced GI dysbiosis occur in a receptor-dependent manner, which can be inhibited by opioid antagonism;⁵⁶ however, this is yet to be investigated in humans. In addition, opioids impair gut epithelial integrity through disruption of the intestinal barrier function and tight junction damage in mice, increasing the risk of bacterial translocation and systemic infection.⁵⁸

Opioids affect GI motility by the inhibition of intestinal neural excitability. The resultant faecal stasis can lead to microbiological imbalance and GI dysbiosis, resulting in a reduced diversity and dominance of harmful bacteria, a reduction in endogenous anaerobic and Gram-positive flora and an increase in endotoxin load. Translocation of bacteria and endotoxins can lead to infections and enhanced systemic inflammation.^50,55 Again, the precise role of opioids in this is yet to be delineated.

Overall, there is potential for opioids to increase the risk of ICU-acquired infections, through the mechanisms of structural and functional dysbiosis, immunosuppression, prolonged ventilation, poor clearance of secretions and GI motility dysfunction. Despite this, the potential causal effect of opioid exposure on the development of ICU-acquired infection warrants further evaluation.

Acute opioid tolerance and opioid-induced iatrogenic withdrawal syndrome

Given the large opioid dose for prolonged periods, ventilated patients are at an increased risk of acute opioid tolerance and iatrogenic withdrawal. Acute opioid tolerance results from the desensitisation of antinociceptive pathways to opioids. This results in an increased requirement of opioid to achieve equianalgesia, with escalating doses of opioids increasing the likelihood of adverse effects.

Once acute tolerance occurs, abrupt cessation of opioid infusions can result in a withdrawal syndrome. The incidence of iatrogenic withdrawal syndrome in ventilated trauma and surgical patients was 32%⁵⁹ and 44%, respectively,,⁶⁰ although these studies were confounded by concomitant benzodiazepine use. This issue was addressed by Hyun et al.,⁶¹ who found that in ventilated patients with low or no benzodiazepine sedation, the incidence of opioid-induced withdrawal syndrome was 29.4%. The incidence of withdrawal was higher in patients receiving remifentanil (31%) and fentanyl (36%) compared to morphine (9.7%). Patients receiving remifentanil and fentanyl had a higher opioid dose compared to morphine, with a shorter duration of opioid therapy, indicating more rapid tolerance. In a prospective study by Wang et al., withdrawal symptoms were recorded in 16.7% of patients, suggesting opioid weaning prior to discontinuation may reduce the incidence of opioid-induced withdrawal syndrome.62 The authors reported a possible association between higher median opioid dose and longer duration of opioid therapy with the development of a withdrawal syndrome; however, they noted that their conclusions were likely limited by their small sample size.

Difficulties exist in the ICU population in determining the incidence of opioid-induced iatrogenic withdrawal syndrome. First, there is no validated withdrawal assessment tool for non-communicative patients. The withdrawal assessment tool 1 (WAT-1), an assessment tool that is validated in the paediatric ICU population, was evaluated in adult ICU patients. There was poor sensitivity (50%) and specificity (65.9%), with poor agreement between WAT-1 and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-V) ( $κ$ = 0.102).⁶³ Second, it is possible that withdrawal may be due to other medications (e.g. benzodiazepines). Third, the diagnostic criteria for opioid-induced iatrogenic withdrawal syndrome are non-specific. For these reasons, studies targeted at iatrogenic opioid withdrawal in the ICU are unlikely to be accurate. However, patients who have received prolonged opioid infusions may benefit from opioid weaning prior to abrupt discontinuation to prevent opioid withdrawal.

Opioid-induced hyperalgesia

OIH is defined as an increase in sensitivity to noxious stimuli resulting in increased pain due to opioid use.⁶⁴ Although it is possible to acquire OIH with the use of any opioid, it is more prevalent after the use of phenylpiperidine derivatives, such as remifentanil, and to a lesser extent, fentanyl.^{26,30,64
–67} OIH is clinically similar to acute opioid tolerance resulting in the decreased analgesic efficacy of opioids, although the mechanisms differ. Although not completely understood, OIH occurs with sensitisation of pronociceptive pathways, leading to hyperalgesia. This differs from the mechanism for acute opioid tolerance. Both pathways are thought to involve central N-methyl-d-aspartate (NMDA) receptor–mediated glutamine transmission and γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA) receptors and peripheral mu-opioid receptors.⁶⁸

Given the unique situation in ICU patients, the diagnosis of opioid-induced hyperalgesia may be problematic. In non-ICU patients, one diagnostic tool is the quantitative sensory test, which determines pain thresholds to differing opioids. This may help with differentiation between acute opioid tolerance and OIH. It is self-evident that it would be difficult to conduct such tests in sedated of mechanically ventilated patients. Other issues that may confound OIH diagnosis include opioid-resistant pain, multiple potential sources of acute pain (see Table 1) and psychological factors such as delirium and pain catastrophising.⁶⁸ On a practical note, if the patient has OIH, a reduction in opioid may reduce pain severity. If the patient has acute opioid tolerance, an increase in opioid may help. In these settings, alternative reasons for increased analgesic requirement should be sought. These include neuropathic pain, multi-site pain, psychological distress, and patients who receive chronic opioid therapy.

It may be difficult clinically to distinguish poor analgesia due to acute opioid tolerance from OIH. Increasing or decreasing the dose of opioid in a ventilated patient may not elicit any meaningful insight into the problem. Clinical management of these patients with non-opioid analgesia may attenuate these phenomena. One of the more useful interventions is NMDA antagonism with ketamine, although the risk of psychomimetic side-effects such as delirium needs to weighed up against the analgesic benefits.⁶⁸ In addition, the gabapentinoids and alpha-2 agonists may attenuate wound hyperalgesia in the postoperative setting⁶⁴ and may play a role in the ICU cohort.

Long-term adverse effects of opioids in the intensive care unit

The potential long-term adverse effects of opioid use during ICU admission include persistent opioid use and chronic post–intensive care unit pain (CPIP).

Persistent opioid use after the intensive care unit

Several studies of varying ICU cohorts have analysed the incidence and potential causative factors associated with persistent opioid use after the ICU.^{1,34,69
–79} Overall, the incidence of persistent opioid use after the ICU ranges from 2.6% to 70%. This observed variability is due to the inclusion of patients with pre-existing opioid use, variable time to follow-up, differing definitions of chronic opioid therapy and the patient cohort being studied.

The incidence of chronic post-ICU opioid use ranges from 2.6% to 16.3% in patients who were opioid-naive prior to ICU admission.^{1,34,70
–72,74
–79} Trials with a larger incidence of persistent opioid use used a definition of single prescriptions of opioids. Using a time-based prescription of 120 days of opioid supply within the first year after ICU hospitalisation, Wunsch et al. reported the incidence of chronic opioid therapy in ICU patients receiving mechanical ventilation to be 2.6%,¹ with prescriptions occurring more in surgical patients than medical patients (4.1% versus 1.6% at 12 months). This was similar to a study of postoperative ICU admission, in which the incidence was 4.1%.⁷¹

In patients identified as chronic opioid users, admission to the ICU has a varied effect on opioid prescriptions after discharge. Yaffe et al.⁸⁰ describe a 44% relative reduction in opioid prescriptions in chronic opioid users in the first 12 months after ICU discharge, with a 71% relative reduction over four years. Wang et al.⁶⁹ found that 63% of elderly chronic opioid users had at least one opioid prescription six months after ICU discharge, with approximately one-quarter having a higher opioid dose. Dunn et al.⁷⁰ also found a high incidence of opioid prescription, with 61% and 44% of traumatic brain-injured patients still receiving an opioid prescription at six and 12 months, respectively. Wampole et al.⁷⁸ found that 70% of chronic opioid users had one opioid prescription filled at three months post-discharge, with similar proportions at six and 12 months. Again, these results should be interpreted with caution as the outcomes are based on single prescriptions of opioids.

These data suggest that there is a decrease in opioid use over time after ICU discharge for both patients who are opioid naive and those receiving chronic opioid therapy.^70,74,80 This reduction may be a result of improved follow-up services, in which chronic opioid therapy may be weaned or discontinued. However, follow-up studies are notorious for loss to follow-up. Given the mortality rate of ICU survivors is approximately 15%–20% at 12 months,^81
–83 this may contain a large proportion of patients who are on chronic opioid therapy, who are at an increased risk of 12-month mortality.⁸⁴ Von Oelreich et al.⁷⁹ found that approximately 21% of patients who died within six to 18 months after ICU discharge were receiving chronic opioid therapy. In addition, the use of non-prescription, illicit opioids in survivors of the ICU is currently unknown.

The relationship between ICU opioid exposure and persistent opioid use is not well studied. The few studies that have investigated this all used a definition of a single prescription, rather than a time-based definition of chronic opioid therapy.^34,70,78 As there is no consensus definition of chronic opioid therapy, it is a difficult endpoint to study. In addition, the exposure of opioid dose was a cumulative dose for the entire ICU admission, which ignores the varying nature of opioid exposure and confounders.

Using a stringent definition of chronic opioid therapy, it is remarkable that less than 5% of ICU patients are receiving chronic opioid therapy at 12 months, especially given the exposure to high-dose, prolonged opioid by infusion. Standardised outcome definitions and methodological considerations will enable a more robust estimation of the causal effect of such opioid exposure and chronic opioid use in the ICU cohort.

Chronic post–intensive care unit pain

Improvements in the management of critically ill patients have resulted in improved survival, albeit with an increased risk of physical, cognitive and psychiatric disability, collectively known as post–intensive care unit syndrome (PICS).⁸⁵ One component of PICS is the development of CPIP. Currently, there is no consensus definition of CPIP, but the revised definition of chronic primary pain is ‘Pain in one or more anatomical regions that persists or recurs for longer than 3 months and is associated with significant emotional distress or functional disability and that cannot be better accounted for by another chronic pain condition’.⁸⁶

The precise prevalence of CPIP is difficult to establish, ranging from 22% to 94.1%.^87
–91 Such diverse estimates are explained by variation in study cohorts, study locations, definitions of CPIP, time frames of evaluation, study designs, and analytical methods. The majority of long-term outcome studies use the EuroQOL-5D (EQ-5D), with the incidence of body pain present in 40%–50% of ICU survivors.^92
–108 While the pain domain of the EQ-5D does not meet the definition of chronic pain, it is reasonable to suspect that the incidence of CPIP is high. It is also interesting to note that the incidence of chronic opioid use after ICU discharge is considerably lower than the incidence of CPIP. It is suggested that one possible reason for this is a reduction in the use of chronic opioid therapy in the treatment of chronic non-cancer pain.⁸⁰ In comparison, it should be noted that patients with chronic post-surgical pain have a prevalence of chronic opioid use of 4%–11%.⁸⁰ It is also interesting to note that the incidence of chronic opioid use after the ICU is considerably lower than the incidence of CPIP. The authors suggested that one possible reason for this is a reduction in the use of opioid therapy in the treatment of chronic non-cancer pain, which they suggest is supported by opioid prescriptions for chronic opioid use for pain accounting for approximately 30% of all opioid prescriptions in the community.⁸⁰ Hence, it is not unexpected that the use of chronic opioid therapy in ICU survivors is lower than those with CPIP.

It remains difficult to determine whether opioid use within the ICU causes CPIP. Although there is a biological plausibility that high-dose, continuous opioid infusions could potentially sensitise to acute pain, resulting in a transition to chronic pain, it would be difficult to establish the contribution of opioids and acute pain to this. Animal studies¹⁰⁹ have shown that opioid administration can result in an enhanced hyperalgesic state, in which the balance of pronociceptive and antinociceptive systems favours pronociception and results in a state of latent pain sensitisation. A human volunteer study showed varied development of latent pain sensitisation from acute opioid exposure; however, the pathophysiology of opioid-induced chronic pain is worthy of further investigation.

The possibility of opioid exposure in the ICU resulting in CPIP was addressed in a study by Hayhurst et al.⁸⁹ In survivors of the ICU, the cumulative total fentanyl dose was associated with a 2.5 times risk (OR 2.58, 95% CI 1.26 to 5.29) of chronic pain at 12 months post–ICU discharge, although, debatably, the authors considered this to be non-significant after applying a multiplicity adjustment. It is unknown if this response is contingent on fentanyl, or if other opioids have a similar response. Pain was not measured to enable adjustment in the regression analysis; hence it is unknown whether the cumulative opioid dose was sub- or supratherapeutic in order to hypothesise the pathophysiological pathway in the development of CPIP.

Given the biological plausibility of opioid-induced chronic pain and the exposure of critically ill patients to high doses of opioids for prolonged periods, it is important to consider the potential role of opioids in the development of CPIP. Similar to the effect of opioids on ICU delirium, a study that adjusts for acute pain will be required to show a potential causal or contributory effect of opioids on CPIP.

Strategies to minimise opioid use in the intensive care unit

The need to manage acute pain is often offset with the potential adverse effects of opioid therapy, with both situations leading to increased morbidity. With the increasing use of opioids as first-line analgesic management it can prove difficult to achieve opioid minimisation, while ensuring adequate analgesia. Unfortunately, there is limited evidence to guide such a practice. Potential strategies to aid in opioid minimisation in the ICU should be targeted at the biological, psychological and social determinants of pain (see Table 2). Some of these strategies are discussed.

Table 2.

Opioid minimisation strategies in the intensive care unit.

Overall assessment	Identify patients who are high-risk for severe acute pain (e.g. trauma, burns) and consider appropriate multimodal analgesia (incl. ketamine, regional analgesia)
Pain assessment	Regular, protocolised pain assessment with validated pain assessment tools
Pain assessment	Assess pain before and after analgesic intervention
Appropriate opioid use	Use of intermittent opioid boluses rather than continuous infusions
	Avoidance of excessive dose escalation
	Titration of opioid to tolerable pain intensity (i.e. titrate to patient response or function, not a behavioural pain number)
	Periprocedural analgesia
	Consider opioid rotation after five to seven days (if using continuous infusion)
	Use opioid weaning protocol after five to seven days of continuous opioid infusion
	Reconcile continued opioid therapy on discharge from intensive care
Multimodal analgesia	Paracetamol
	Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs
	Ketamine
	α₂-agonists
	Gabapentinoids
	Lidocaine infusion
Regional analgesia	Perineural catheters
Regional analgesia	Neuraxial/fascial plane regional analgesia
Side-effect management	Use of methylnaltrexone for opioid-induced constipation
Sedation management	Minimisation of antalgesic sedatives (midazolam, propofol)
Non-pharmacological management	Physiotherapy (early mobilisation)
	Occupational therapy (sensory education, environmental intervention, positioning and splinting)
	Psychological therapy (e.g. psychological support)
	Optimal sleep hygiene
	Distraction therapy (e.g. music, movies, family)
	Massage therapy
	Relaxation therapy
	Relaxed visiting hours

Approaches to pain assessment and management

It is important that clinicians have a clear sense of the presence of acute pain in patients in the ICU. Patients who have a superficially disproportionate response to pain should prompt a concerted search for additional contributory sociocultural and psychological factors. These include, but are not limited to, delirium, sleep deprivation, existential threat, post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety and depression, previous trauma, and being from a cultural and linguistically diverse community. Addressing these factors may result in improved analgesia.

Approaches to analgesic pharmacotherapy

Intermittent versus continuous opioid infusions

Given that opioid infusions can produce acute opioid tolerance, OIH and opioid withdrawal syndrome, intermittent opioid boluses may reduce the incidence of opioid-related adverse effects. Intermittent bolusing of opioids also reduces the accumulation of active drug and metabolites, which can potentially result in a decreased duration of mechanical ventilation. In a retrospective analysis, patients initiated on a continuous infusion of fentanyl experienced more delirium than those receiving intermittent boluses of fentanyl. There was no difference in the duration of mechanical ventilation and ICU length of stay between the groups.¹¹⁰

Periprocedural analgesia

Critically ill patients experience pain during standard care procedures, including turning, arterial line insertion, chest tube removal, endotracheal tube suctioning, and drain removal.^3,46 Pre-emptive analgesia may result in less post-procedural postprocedural pain and opioid requirement, although this has not been studied. A strategy of preprocedural pain assessment and appropriately timed pre-emptive analgesia should be used for procedures known to cause pain.¹⁰

Opioid weaning protocols

In patients tolerant to opioids, abrupt cessation usually results in a withdrawal syndrome. As mentioned previously, acute opioid tolerance may occur in ICU patients after five to seven days of continuous opioid infusion. In the setting of acute opioid tolerance, it would be prudent to institute an opioid weaning plan. Such plans implement a stepwise reduction of opioid tapering that may last as long as one week. The use of methadone replacement in the ICU to facilitate weaning from fentanyl infusions has been studied. In two studies, mechanically ventilated patients receiving a continuous fentanyl infusion, replacement of fentanyl with enteral methadone resulted in a higher probability of successful weaning with a decreased time to extubation.^111,112 In addition, an opioid taper regimen has been suggested,¹¹³ decreasing the infusion rate by 20%–40%, followed by 10% every 12–24 hours in patients at low risk of opioid withdrawal or 5%–10% reduction in dose per day in patients who have received high-dose opioids for greater than five days.

Opioid rotation

Opioid rotation to a different opioid occurs when opioid tolerance results in diminishing analgesia and there are concerns about the harms of opioid dose escalation. Opioid rotation takes advantage of incomplete cross-tolerance, whereby different receptor subtypes and specific opioid desensitisation result in improved analgesia and the use of a relatively lower dose of the new opioid.¹¹⁴ Another potential effect of opioid rotation is the alleviation of the antalgesic effect of 3-glucuronide metabolites, seen with morphine and hydromorphone. Rotation to alternative opioids without active metabolites will decrease 3-glucuronide levels, potentially improving analgesic efficacy.¹¹⁴ A feasibility study of ventilated ICU patients showed that opioid rotation was possible.³³ Patients were rotated from fentanyl infusions to hydromorphone infusions. Although there was improved analgesia, the cumulative opioid dose was similar after rotation, suggesting a disconnect between the opioid dose administered and pain. Nevertheless, opioid rotation should be considered for patients who are on continuous opioid infusions for longer than five to seven days, but this requires further investigation.

Opioid prescriptions on discharge from the intensive care unit

Administration of an opioid in the hospital setting is associated with an increase in opioid prescription at hospital discharge and in the community.¹¹⁵ In a study examining the continuation of opioid therapy at the transitions of care of opioid-naive, ventilated ICU patients, it was found that 56.1% of patients continued opioid therapy from the ICU to the ward.¹¹⁶ It was also found that 31.9% of all patients continued opioid therapy to hospital discharge. Given the increased risk of inappropriate continuation of opioid therapy and its associated morbidity, it is important to liaise with and refer to appropriate services (e.g. admitting team, acute pain team, drug and alcohol services) to implement appropriate opioid stewardship.

Non-opioid adjuvant analgesics

Given the variable aetiology of acute pain, the addition of non-opioid analgesics that target various nociceptive pathways may produce synergistic analgesic effects that result in a reduction in the required opioid dose.

Paracetamol is a commonly administered analgesic with a mechanism of action that is unclear but may include cyclo-oxygenase inhibition in addition to endocannabinoid effects. Investigation into its use is limited to small studies in specific patient cohorts. In postoperative ICU patients, the addition of paracetamol resulted in a reduction in pain scores, opioid consumption and time to extubation.¹¹⁷ In one study of intravenous paracetamol in ICU patients post-craniotomy, there was no difference in either pain scores or opioid consumption.¹¹⁸ Despite the lack of evidence in general ICU patients, the risk of harm is thought to be low. Administration intravenously did not result in an increase in the incidence of hepatic dysfunction,¹¹⁹ but did increase the incidence of hypotension that required intervention.¹²⁰ Given the potential opioid reduction and improved analgesia, and a probable low risk of harm, the addition of paracetamol may be beneficial in opioid reduction strategies.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are effective analgesics; however, the perceived risk of adverse effects limits widespread use. When 24 hours of ketoprofen was added to an opioid infusion in postoperative major abdominal surgery patients, the result was a reduction in opioid consumption (by approximately 20%), pain scores, and nausea and vomiting. There were no reported bleeding events or episodes of acute kidney injury.¹²¹ In addition, the use of ketorolac in patients with rib fractures was associated with a decrease in the incidence of pneumonia and shorter ventilation times, with no apparent increase in the risk of bleeding or renal failure.¹²² The safety of ibuprofen in patients with sepsis was demonstrated with no increase in the incidence of acute kidney injury, GI bleeding or occult bleeding.¹²³ Coxib NSAIDs may be a useful adjunct due to the decreased risk of gastric ulceration and the lack of platelet inhibition, with the benefits of decreased opioid consumption and improved analgesia.

Continuous infusions of low-dose ketamine, an NMDA antagonist, is a commonly used analgesic strategy to decrease opioid consumption and hyperalgesia in the postoperative setting. Its use in the ICU is less well studied, with varying results. A retrospective before–after observational study of 390 mechanically ventilated patients who were administered a continuous infusion of ketamine showed an increase in achieved target scores for pain and sedation, with no difference in the duration of delirium.¹²⁴ This reduction in opioid dose was also observed in awake, postoperative ICU patients¹²⁵ as well as ventilated postoperative ICU patients.¹²⁶ In contrast, another retrospective, uncontrolled before–after study found an increase in daily opioid dose after the initiation of ketamine,¹²⁷ while a randomised trial found no difference in opioid consumption although there was a reduction in the incidence of delirium.¹²⁸ Methodological approaches may account for the observed differences in addition to the dose of ketamine used. Analgesic doses of ketamine (0.1–0.2 mg/kg/h) typically have a lower side-effect profile compared with sedative doses of ketamine (1–2 mg/kg/h). Nevertheless, patients at risk of moderate to severe acute pain may benefit from a continuous, low-dose ketamine infusion.

The alpha-2 agonists dexmedetomidine and clonidine are weak analgesics but may aid in analgesia, through the management of psychological causes of acute pain (e.g. delirium and agitation) and by the avoidance of potentially antalgesic sedatives.⁴⁴ A systematic review found that the addition of clonidine to standard sedation resulted in decreased opioid dose, with no difference in the duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU mortality or ICU length of stay.¹²⁹ In post–coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) patients, sedation with dexmedetomidine was associated with significantly lower morphine requirements than propofol-based sedation.¹³⁰ While the benefits of using alpha-2 agonists lie predominantly with sedation strategies, there may be some benefit with regard to opioid reduction.

The gabapentinoids, gabapentin and pregabalin, may be effective in improving analgesia and decreasing opioid consumption in the patient with neuropathic or unyielding nociceptive pain. In ventilated patients with Guillain–Barré syndrome, the administration of gabapentin resulted in a decrease in pain scores and opioid consumption.^131,132 However, in a pilot study of critically ill patients with rib fractures, the addition of gabapentin compared with placebo to a multimodal analgesic regimen did not result in a difference in pain scores, opioid consumption, oxygen requirement or incentive spirometry.¹³³ In cardiac surgical patients, the use of pregabalin resulted in a decrease in opioid consumption, improved acute and chronic pain, and a decreased incidence of delirium in the elderly.^134,135 As the gabapentinoids are eliminated unchanged in the urine, accumulation and increased sedation may occur in the setting of renal impairment, in which dose adjustment may be warranted. In addition, patients on long-term gabapentinoid therapy should be weaned prior to discontinuation, as abrupt cessation may result in a withdrawal syndrome. Overall, the potential benefits of gabapentinoids in the setting of neuropathic pain need to outweigh the risks of increased sedation in the setting of renal impairment. Clearly, further evaluation is needed in the general ICU cohort.

The use of lidocaine is well established as a useful analgesic adjunct in the treatment of acute pain. Intravenous lidocaine infusions have had varied success in the treatment of acute pain, neuropathic pain and chronic pain.^136
–138 Studies examining the use of lidocaine infusions in the general ICU are limited to retrospective, case-controlled studies.^136,139 In these studies, the addition of lidocaine infusion resulted in a reduction in opioid consumption and pain scores. However, acute neurological adverse effects (decreased conscious state, confusion) were noted in patients who developed acute kidney injury with resultant elevated serum lidocaine levels. The adverse effects resolved on discontinuation of lidocaine. Given that a large proportion of ICU patients develop end-organ dysfunction, the risk of lidocaine toxicity is increased. In this setting, regular serum lidocaine levels should be monitored, which may preclude widespread use. Needless to say, further randomised controlled trials are warranted to determine the role of lidocaine infusions for the treatment of acute pain.

Regional analgesia

The use of neuraxial analgesia (e.g. epidural, paravertebral blocks), fascial-plane catheters (e.g. erector spinae blocks) and peripheral nerve blocks may be of analgesic benefit for critically ill trauma and postoperative patients. Regional analgesia (RA) techniques can result in improved analgesia, and reduced opioid requirements and opioid-related adverse effects. The predominant indications for RA in the ICU are thoracoabdominal surgery and trunk trauma.¹⁴⁰

Thoracic epidural analgesia has shown benefit in abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery,¹⁴¹ traumatic rib fractures,^142,143 and thoracoabdominal procedures.¹⁴⁴ In geriatric trauma patients admitted to the ICU with rib fractures, the use of RA resulted in a decrease in the incidence of delirium, with a reduced cumulative daily opioid dose.¹⁴³ There was no effect on the incidence of attributable pneumonia.

Regional analgesic techniques for rib fractures include thoracic epidural, paravertebral, intercostal, erector spinae, and serratus anterior catheters. Transversus abdominis plane, rectus sheath or preperitoneal catheters may be used for abdominal procedures, reducing the potential morbidity of a thoracic epidural (e.g. hypotension, poor mobilisation). Specific nerve distributions may be targeted in trauma patients, such as brachial plexus blocks for upper limb pathology or sciatic nerve blocks for foot and ankle pathology. Close liaison with the acute pain team is essential to facilitate RA in the ICU.

Choice of sedatives

The choice of sedative in mechanically ventilated patients may affect pain perception. In a healthy volunteer study, patients were randomly assigned to receive moderate sedation with midazolam, propofol or dexmedetomidine, and the responses to experimental pain tasks (cold, heat, ischaemic or electrical) were recorded.⁴⁴ Midazolam increased cold, heat and electrical pain perception significantly. Dexmedetomidine reduced both cold and ischaemic pain perception significantly, and propofol had non-significant varied effects on all modalities. While it is not known if this translates to the ICU cohort, it is possible that midazolam and potentially propofol are antalgesic sedatives, and that alternatives such as dexmedetomidine should be used.

Future directions

As evidenced by the paucity of data investigating the effects of opioids during and after ICU admission, further research is warranted. This would further elucidate the short-term adverse effects of opioids such as delirium and ICU-acquired infections, and the long-term adverse effects such as the role of opioids in developing chronic opioid therapy and chronic post-ICU pain. The ethical limitations of conducting randomised controlled trials into opioids versus no opioids precludes the robust estimation of causal effects of opioids on outcomes. Hence, the use of observational data under a causal inference target trial framework is appropriate.

Short-term effects of opioids

Given the biological plausibility of the effects of opioids on delirium, acute tolerance and withdrawal syndrome, and ICU-acquired infection, these effects should be established. As previously mentioned, there exist many time-varying confounders in the causal pathway from opioid exposure to outcome. In critically ill patients, these may include acute pain, sedation, the presence of mechanical ventilation, adjuvant analgesics, sepsis, and delirium. In addition, factors such as admission diagnosis, socioeconomic factors, prior substance use and gender may also play a role. For robust estimation of the potential causation of opioids on short-term outcomes using observational data, specific methodology should be employed (discussed below).

Long-term effects of opioids

The role of opioids in the development of chronic opioid therapy and chronic post-ICU pain is currently unknown. As with the studies examining the potential short-term adverse effects of opioids, studies investigating the long-term outcomes suffer the same complexities of robust estimation of potential causal effects. In addition to the issues mentioned above, studies of long-term outcomes are susceptible to loss to follow-up, and this selection bias needs to be accounted for in any estimation of effect.

Methodological and statistical approaches

Approaches to the design and analysis of studies to determine unbiased causal effects of opioid exposure within the ICU to specified outcomes remain complex. Complexities include the presence of correlated data (e.g. daily opioid dose or daily pain scores), the presence of variables that are both mediators and confounders for the outcome (e.g. opioid dose, pain and delirium), time-varying confounding, and multiple time-varying exposures for the outcome. For this reason, standard multivariable regression techniques, using adjustment for time-invariant confounding or a single variable composite of complex exposures (e.g. total opioid dose for an ICU admission), are inappropriate and may lead to erroneous estimates. Likewise, the addition of all potential variables into a regression model and using P-values to determine ‘risk factors’ may result in effect estimation of mediators, confounders, proxy confounders and competing exposures (the Table 2 fallacy),¹⁴⁵ rather than an exposure–outcome causal effect.

These issues require specific analysis. Adjustment of time-varying confounders using a marginal structural model may give a more accurate estimate of potential causation.¹⁴⁶ The use of a potential outcomes framework with a target trial emulation of a randomised controlled trial enables transparency and reproducibility in observational data when a randomised trial cannot be performed.^147,148 Target trials, utilising marginal structural models or g-computation may enable the determination of a less biased exposure–outcome causal effect.

Conclusion

Opioids remain an integral component of the management of acute pain in the ICU. However, opioid use may be associated with both short-term and long-term morbidity, including delirium, ICU-acquired infection, acute opioid tolerance, opioid-induced hyperalgesia, opioid-induced iatrogenic withdrawal syndrome, chronic opioid therapy, and chronic post-ICU pain. Both the large cumulative dose and prolonged duration of opioid therapy in mechanically ventilated patients in the ICU may increase the risk of opioid-related morbidity. Currently, the potential causal pathways between opioid use and the aforementioned adverse effects have yet to be fully elucidated, and precise measurement tools are lacking. In addition, a more nuanced, patient-specific approach to opioid management within the ICU is warranted, with the dual aim of opioid minimisation and optimisation of analgesia. Finally, it remains to be seen if the application of opioid minimisation strategies resulting in a reduction in opioid use in the ICU will lead to a reduction in the short- and long-term adverse effects of ICU opioid therapy.

Footnotes

Author contribution(s)

Benjamin L Moran: Conceptualization; Methodology; Resources; Writing – original draft; Writing – review & editing.

John A Myburgh: Supervision; Validation.

David A Scott: Supervision; Validation.

Acknowledgements

The author(s) would like to thank Meredith Craigie for assistance in the review of this article.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Benjamin L Moran

References

Wunsch

Hill

, et al. New opioid use after invasive mechanical ventilation and hospital discharge. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2020; 202: 568–575. doi:10.1164/rccm.201912-2503OC

Girard

Thompson

Pandharipande

, et al. Clinical phenotypes of delirium during critical illness and severity of subsequent long-term cognitive impairment: a prospective cohort study. Lancet Respirat Med 2018; 6: 213–222. doi:10.1016/S2213-2600(18)30062-6

Puntillo

Morris

Thompson

, et al. Pain behaviors observed during six common procedures: results from Thunder Project II. Crit Care Med 2004; 32: 421–427. doi:10.1097/01.CCM.0000108875.35298.D2

Kyranou

Puntillo

The transition from acute to chronic pain: might intensive care unit patients be at risk?

Ann Intensive Care 2012; 2: 36. doi:10.1186/2110-5820-2-36

Azzam

Alam

Pain in the ICU: a psychiatric perspective. J Intensive Care Med 2013; 28: 140–150. doi:10.1177/0885066611432417

Erstad

Puntillo

Gilbert

, et al. Pain management principles in the critically ill. Chest 2009; 135: 1075–1086. doi:10.1378/chest.08-2264

Rotondi

Chelluri

Sirio

, et al . Patients’ recollections of stressful experiences while receiving prolonged mechanical ventilation in an intensive care unit. Crit Care Med 2002; 30: 746–752.

Chanques

Sebbane

Barbotte

, et al. A prospective study of pain at rest: incidence and characteristics of an unrecognized symptom in surgical and trauma versus medical intensive care unit patients. Anesthesiology 2007; 107: 858–860. doi:10.1097/01.anes.0000287211.98642.51

Chanques

Jaber

Barbotte

, et al. Impact of systematic evaluation of pain and agitation in an intensive care unit. Crit Care Med 2006; 34: 1691–1699. doi:10.1097/01.CCM.0000218416.62457.56

10.

Devlin

Skrobik

Gélinas

, et al. Clinical practice guidelines for the prevention and management of pain, agitation/sedation, delirium, immobility, and sleep disruption in adult patients in the ICU. Crit Care Med 2018; 46: e825–e873. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000003299

11.

Ray

Karlekar

Crouse

, et al. Care of the critically ill burn patient: an overview from the perspective of optimizing palliative care. Annals ATS. Epub ahead of print 7 June 2017. doi:10.1513/AnnalsATS.201607-577PS

12.

Karamchandani

Carr

Bonavia

, et al. Critical care pain management in patients affected by the opioid epidemic: a review. Annals ATS 2018; 15: 1016–1023. doi:10.1513/AnnalsATS.201801-028CME

13.

Hussain Khan

Majedi

Asaad Hassan

Pain management in spinal cord injury: a narrative review. AACC. Epub ahead of print 30 April 2019. doi:10.18502/aacc.v5i2.753

14.

Soliman

Mélot

Vincent

JL.

Sedative and analgesic practice in the intensive care unit: the results of a European survey. Br J Anaesth 2001; 87: 186–192. doi:10.1093/bja/87.2.186

15.

Murdoch

Cohen

Intensive care sedation: a review of current British practice. Intensive Care Med 2000; 26: 922–928. doi:10.1007/s001340051282

16.

Jung

Lee

HJ.

Utilisation of medications among elderly patients in intensive care units: a cross-sectional study using a nationwide claims database. BMJ Open 2019; 9: e026605. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026605

17.

Payen

Chanques

Mantz

, et al. Current practices in sedation and analgesia for mechanically ventilated critically ill patients: a prospective multicenter patient-based study. Anesthesiology 2007; 106: 687–695. doi:10.1097/01.anes.0000264747.09017.da

18.

Burry

Williamson

Perreault

, et al. Analgesic, sedative, antipsychotic, and neuromuscular blocker use in Canadian intensive care units: a prospective, multicentre, observational study. Can J Anesth/J Can Anesth 2014; 61: 619–630. doi:10.1007/s12630-014-0174-1

19.

Elliott

Aitken

Bucknall

, et al. Patient comfort in the intensive care unit: a multicentre, binational point prevalence study of analgesia, sedation and delirium management. Crit Care Resusc 2013; 15: 213–219.

20.

Shehabi

Bellomo

Kadiman

, et al. Sedation intensity in the first 48 hours of mechanical ventilation and 180-day mortality: a multinational prospective longitudinal cohort study*. Crit Care Med 2018; 46: 850–859. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000003071

21.

Shehabi

Howe

Bellomo

, et al. Early sedation with dexmedetomidine in critically ill patients. N Engl J Med 2019; 380: 2506–2517. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1904710

22.

Payen

Genty

Mimoz

, et al. Prescribing nonopioids in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients. J Crit Care 2013; 28: 534 e7–e12. doi:10.1016/j.jcrc.2012.10.006

23.

O’Connor

Bucknall

Manias

Sedation management in Australian and New Zealand intensive care units: doctors’ and nurses’ practices and opinions. Am J Crit Care 2010; 19: 285–295. doi:10.4037/ajcc2009541

24.

Martin

Parsch

Franck

, et al. Practice of sedation and analgesia in German intensive care units: results of a national survey. Crit Care 2005; 9: R117. doi:10.1186/cc3035

25.

Casamento

Serpa Neto

Young

, et al. A phase II cluster-crossover randomized trial of fentanyl vs. morphine for analgosedation in mechanically ventilated patients. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. Epub ahead of print 20 September 2021. rccm.202106–1515OC. doi:10.1164/rccm.202106-1515OC

26.

Muellejans

Lopez

Cross

, et al. Remifentanil versus fentanyl for analgesia based sedation to provide patient comfort in the intensive care unit: a randomized, double-blind controlled trial [ISRCTN43755713]. Crit Care 2004; 8: R1–R11. doi:10.1186/cc2398

27.

Karabinis

Mandragos

Stergiopoulos

, et al. Safety and efficacy of analgesia-based sedation with remifentanil versus standard hypnotic-based regimens in intensive care unit patients with brain injuries: a randomised, controlled trial. Crit Care 2004; 8: R268. doi:10.1186/cc2896

28.

Dahaba

Grabner

Rehak

, et al. Remifentanil versus morphine analgesia and sedation for mechanically ventilated critically ill patients. Anesthesiology 2004; 101: 640–646. doi:10.1097/00000542-200409000-00012

29.

Futier

Chanques

Cayot Constantin

, et al. Influence of opioid choice on mechanical ventilation duration and ICU length of stay. Minerva Anestesiol 2012; 78: 46–53.

30.

EHY

Tran

DHD

Lam

, et al. Remifentanil tolerance and hyperalgesia: short-term gain, long-term pain? Anaesthesia 2016; 71: 1347–1362. doi:10.1111/anae.13602

31.

Payen

Bosson

Chanques

, et al. Pain assessment is associated with decreased duration of mechanical ventilation in the intensive care unit: a post Hoc analysis of the DOLOREA study. Anesthesiology 2009; 111: 1308–1316. doi:10.1097/ALN.0b013e3181c0d4f0

32.

Wøien

Movements and trends in intensive care pain treatment and sedation: What matters to the patient?

J Clin Nurs 2020; 29: 1129–1140. doi:10.1111/jocn.15179

33.

Brown

Gagnon

Riker

, et al. 974: Opioid rotation in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients: a prospective exploratory study. Crit Care Med 2018; 4: 470. doi:10.1097/01.ccm.0000528981.64716.e8

34.

Chen

Pang

Chowdhury

, et al. Use of Opioids in the Medical Intensive Care Unit is not Associated with Outpatient Opiate Use. In: B105. Critical Care: Counterparts – Non-Pulmonary Critical Care And Multi-Organ Failure. American Thoracic Society, 2019, p. A4135. doi:10.1164/ajrccm-conference.2019.199.1_MeetingAbstracts.A4135

35.

Olsen

Valeberg

Jacobsen

, et al. Pain in intensive care unit patients—a longitudinal study. Nurs Open 2021; 8: 224–231. doi:10.1002/nop2.621

36.

Pun

Badenes

Heras La Calle

, et al. Prevalence and risk factors for delirium in critically ill patients with COVID-19 (COVID-D): a multicentre cohort study. Lancet Respirat Med 2021; 9: 239–250. doi:10.1016/S2213-2600(20)30552-X

37.

Pandharipande

Cotton

Shintani

, et al. Prevalence and risk factors for development of delirium in surgical and trauma intensive care unit patients. J Trauma: Injury, Infect Crit Care 2008; 65: 34–41. doi:10.1097/TA.0b013e31814b2c4d

38.

Burry

Williamson

Mehta

, et al. Delirium and exposure to psychoactive medications in critically ill adults: a multi-centre observational study. J Crit Care 2017; 42: 268–274. doi:10.1016/j.jcrc.2017.08.003

39.

Pavone

Jablonski

Cacchione

, et al. Evaluating pain, opioids, and delirium in critically ill older adults. Clin Nurs Res. Epub ahead of print 20 November 2020. doi:10.1177/1054773820973123

40.

Pisani

Murphy

Araujo

KLB

, et al. Benzodiazepine and opioid use and the duration of intensive care unit delirium in an older population*. Crit Care Med 2009; 37: 177–183. doi:10.1097/CCM.0b013e318192fcf9

41.

Dubois

Bergeron

Dumont

, et al. Delirium in an intensive care unit: a study of risk factors. Intensive Care Med 2001; 27: 1297–1304. doi:10.1007/s001340101017

42.

Ouimet

Kavanagh

Gottfried

, et al. Incidence, risk factors and consequences of ICU delirium. Intensive Care Med 2007; 33: 66–73. doi:10.1007/s00134-006-0399-8

43.

Zaal

Devlin

Peelen

, et al. A systematic review of risk factors for delirium in the ICU*. Crit Care Med 2015; 43: 40–47. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000000625

44.

Frölich

Zhang

Ness

TJ.

Effect of sedation on pain perception. Anesthesiology 2013; 118: 611–621. doi:10.1097/ALN.0b013e318281592d

45.

Siffleet

Young

Nikoletti

, et al. Patients’ self-report of procedural pain in the intensive care unit. J Clin Nurs 2007; 16: 2142–2148. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2702.2006.01840.x

46.

Puntillo

Max

Timsit

, et al. Determinants of procedural pain intensity in the intensive care unit. The Europain(R) study. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2014; 189: 39–47. doi:10.1164/rccm.201306-1174OC

47.

Duprey

Dijkstra-Kersten

SMA

Zaal

, et al. Opioid use increases the risk of delirium in critically ill adults independently of pain. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. Epub ahead of print 9 April 2021. doi:10.1164/rccm.202010-3794OC

48.

Vincent

Sakr

Singer

, et al. Prevalence and outcomes of infection among patients in intensive care units in 2017. JAMA 2020; 323: 1478. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.2717

49.

Smith

Hibino

Falcione

, et al. Immunosuppressive aspects of analgesics and sedatives used in mechanically ventilated patients: an underappreciated risk factor for the development of ventilator-associated pneumonia in critically ill patients. Ann Pharmacother 2014; 48: 77–85. doi:10.1177/1060028013510698

50.

Nseir

Makris

Mathieu

, et al. Intensive care unit-acquired infection as a side effect of sedation. Crit Care 2010; 14: R30. doi:10.1186/cc8907

51.

Kollef

Torres

Shorr

, et al. Nosocomial Infection. Crit Care Med 2021; 49: 169–187. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000004783

52.

Weinert

Kethireddy

Roy

Opioids and infections in the intensive care unit should clinicians and patients be concerned?

J Neuroimmune Pharmacol 2008; 3: 218–229. doi:10.1007/s11481-008-9124-4

53.

Roy

Ninkovic

Banerjee

, et al. Opioid drug abuse and modulation of immune function: consequences in the susceptibility to opportunistic infections. J Neuroimmune Pharmacol 2011; 6: 442–465. doi:10.1007/s11481-011-9292-5

54.

Nseir

Hoel

Grailles

, et al. Remifentanil discontinuation and subsequent intensive care unit-acquired infection: a cohort study. Crit Care 2009; 13: R60. doi:10.1186/cc7788

55.

Makris

Lubret

Nseir

Opioid use and ventilator-associated pneumonia. CRMR 2010; 6: 72–77. doi:10.2174/157339810790820449

56.

Yan

Chen

Zhang

The effect of opioids on gastrointestinal function in the ICU. Crit Care 2021; 25: 370. doi:10.1186/s13054-021-03793-1

57.

Kalgudi

Corbett

, et al. Gut microbiota in surgical and critically ill patients. Anaesth Intensive Care 2020; 48: 179–195. doi:10.1177/0310057X20903732

58.

Wang

Roy

Gut homeostasis, microbial dysbiosis, and opioids. Toxicol Pathol 2017; 45: 150–156. doi:10.1177/0192623316679898

59.

Cammarano

Pittet

Weitz

, et al. Acute withdrawal syndrome related to the administration of analgesic and sedative medications in adult intensive care unit patients: Crit Care Med 1998; 26: 676–684. doi:10.1097/00003246-199804000-00015

60.

Arroyo-Novoa

Figueroa-Ramos

Balas

, et al. Opioid and benzodiazepine withdrawal syndromes in trauma ICU patients: a prospective exploratory study. Crit Care Explorat 2020; 2: e0089. doi:10.1097/CCE.0000000000000089

61.

Hyun

Huh

Hong

, et al. Iatrogenic opioid withdrawal syndrome in critically ill patients: a retrospective cohort study. J Korean Med Sci 2020; 35: e106. doi:10.3346/jkms.2020.35.e106

62.

Wang

Huang

Feng

, et al . Opioid-associated iatrogenic withdrawal in critically ill adult patients: a multicenter prospective observational study. Ann Intensive Care 2017; 7: 88. doi:10.1186/s13613-017-0310-5

63.

Capilnean

Martone

Rosu

, et al. Validation of the withdrawal assessment tool-1 in adult intensive care patients. Am J Crit Care 2019; 28: 361–369. doi:10.4037/ajcc2019559

64.

Hayhurst

Durieux

ME.

Differential opioid tolerance and opioid-induced hyperalgesia: a clinical reality. Anesthesiology 2016; 124: 483–488. doi:10.1097/ALN.0000000000000963

65.

Fletcher

Martinez

Opioid-induced hyperalgesia in patients after surgery: a systematic review and a meta-analysis. Br J Anaesth 2014; 112: 991–1004. doi:10.1093/bja/aeu137

66.

Chia

Liu

Wang

, et al. Intraoperative high dose fentanyl induces postoperative fentanyl tolerance. Can J Anesth 1999; 46: 872–877. doi:10.1007/BF03012978

67.

Collard

Mistraletti

Taqi

, et al. Intraoperative esmolol infusion in the absence of opioids spares postoperative fentanyl in patients undergoing ambulatory laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Anesth Analg 2007; 105: 1255–1262. doi:10.1213/01.ane.0000282822.07437.02

68.

Roberts, L. The opioid tolerant patient. In: Schug

Palmer

Scott

, et al. (eds) Acute Pain Management: Scientific Evidence. Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists; 2020, pp.808–820.

69.

Wang

Hill

Gomes

, et al. Opioid use after ICU admission among elderly chronic opioid users in Ontario: a population-based cohort study. Crit Care Med 2018; 46: 1934–1942. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000003401

70.

Dunn

Taylor

Smith

, et al. Persistent post-discharge opioid prescribing after traumatic brain injury requiring intensive care unit admission: a cross-sectional study with longitudinal outcome. PLoS One 2019; 14: e0225787. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0225787

71.

Karamchandani

Pyati

Bryan

, et al. New persistent opioid use after postoperative intensive care in US veterans. JAMA Surg 2019; 154: 778. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2019.0899

72.

Brescia

Waljee

, et al. Impact of prescribing on new persistent opioid use after cardiothoracic surgery. Ann Thorac Surg 2019; 108: 1107–1113. doi:10.1016/j.athoracsur.2019.06.019

73.

von Oelreich

Eriksson

Brattström

, et al. Risk factors and outcomes of chronic opioid use following trauma. Br J Surg 2020; 107: 413–421. doi:10.1002/bjs.11507

74.

Adil

De La Cruz

Thornton

, et al. Incidence of chronic opioid use in previously opioid-naïve patients receiving opioids for analgesia in the intensive care unit. Fed Pract 2020; 37: 170–176.

75.

Bonnesen

Nikolajsen

Bøggild

, et al. Chronic post‐operative opioid use after open cardiac surgery: a Danish population‐based cohort study. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2021; 65: 47–57. doi:10.1111/aas.13688

76.

Clement

Canner

Whitman

GJR

, et al. New persistent opioid use after aortic and mitral valve surgery in commercially insured patients. Ann Thorac Surg 2020; 110: 829–835. doi:10.1016/j.athoracsur.2019.12.031

77.

Clement

Canner

Lawton

, et al. Predictors of new persistent opioid use after coronary artery bypass grafting. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2020; 160: 954–963.e4. doi:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2019.09.137

78.

Wampole

McKenna

Riker

, et al. 835: Opioid administration during ICU and post ICU care and discharge opioid prescribing practices. Crit Care Med 2021; 49: 414–414. doi:10.1097/01.ccm.0000729228.13596.45

79.

von Oelreich

Eriksson

Sjölund

, et al. Opioid use after intensive care: a nationwide cohort study. Crit Care Med 2021; 49: 462–471. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000004896

80.

Yaffe

Green

Butler

, et al. Is admission to the intensive care unit associated with chronic opioid use? A 4-year follow-up of intensive care unit survivors. J Intensive Care Med 2017; 32: 429–435. doi:10.1177/0885066615618189

81.

Gayat

Cariou

Deye

, et al. Determinants of long-term outcome in ICU survivors: results from the FROG-ICU study. Crit Care 2018; 22(1): 8. doi:10.1186/s13054-017-1922-8

82.

Szakmany

Walters

Pugh

, et al. Risk factors for 1-year mortality and hospital utilization patterns in critical care survivors: a retrospective, observational, population-based data linkage study. Crit Care Med 2019; 47: 15–22. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000003424

83.

Chen

Hillman

, et al. The impact of post-operative sepsis on mortality after hospital discharge among elective surgical patients: a population-based cohort study. Crit Care 2017; 21: 34. doi:10.1186/s13054-016-1596-7

84.

Hardy

Zeba

Ovalle

, et al. Association of prescription opioid use on mortality and hospital length of stay in the intensive care unit. Adrish M, ed. PLoS ONE 2021; 16: e0250320. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0250320

85.

Elliott

Davidson

Harvey

, et al. Exploring the scope of post-intensive care syndrome therapy and care: engagement of non-critical care providers and survivors in a second stakeholders meeting. Crit Care Med 2014; 42: 2518–2526. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000000525

86.

Treede

Rief

Barke

, et al. Chronic pain as a symptom or a disease: the IASP classification of chronic pain for the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11). Pain 2019; 160: 19–27. doi:10.1097/j.pain.0000000000001384

87.

Battle

Lovett

Hutchings

Chronic pain in survivors of critical illness: a retrospective analysis of incidence and risk factors. Crit Care 2013; 17: R101. doi:10.1186/cc12746

88.

Baumbach

Gotz

Gunther

, et al. Prevalence and characteristics of chronic intensive care-related pain: the role of severe sepsis and septic shock. Crit Care Med 2016; 44: 1129–1137. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000001635

89.

Hayhurst

Jackson

Archer

, et al. Pain and its long-term interference of daily life after critical illness. Anesth Analg 2018; 127: 690–697. doi:10.1213/ANE.0000000000003358

90.

Langerud

Rustoen

Brunborg

, et al. Prevalence, location, and characteristics of chronic pain in intensive care survivors. Pain Manag Nurs 2018; 19: 366–376. doi:10.1016/j.pmn.2017.11.005

91.

Devine

Quasim

McPeake

, et al. Chronic pain in intensive care unit survivors: incidence, characteristics and side-effects up to one-year post-discharge. J Rehabil Med 2019; 51: 451–455. doi:10.2340/16501977-2558

92.

Andersen

Flaatten

Klepstad

, et al. Long-term outcomes after ICU admission triage in octogenarians. Crit Care Med 2017; 45: e363–e371. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000002098

93.

Badia

Diaz-Prieto

Gorriz

, et al. Using the EuroQol-5D to measure changes in quality of life 12 months after discharge from an intensive care unit. Intensive Care Med 2001; 27: 1901–1907. doi:10.1007/s00134-001-1137-x

94.

Das Neves

Vasquez

Loudet

, et al. Symptom burden and health-related quality of life among intensive care unit survivors in Argentina: a prospective cohort study. J Crit Care 2015; 30: 1049–1054. doi:10.1016/j.jcrc.2015.05.021

95.

Granja

Dias

Costa-Pereira

, et al. Quality of life of survivors from severe sepsis and septic shock may be similar to that of others who survive critical illness. Crit Care 2004; 8: R91–R98. doi:10.1186/cc2818

96.

Granja

Teixeira-Pinto

Costa-Pereira

Quality of life after intensive care – evaluation with EQ-5D questionnaire. Intensive Care Med 2002; 28: 898–907. doi:10.1007/s00134-002-1345-z

97.

Granja

Morujao

Costa-Pereira

Quality of life in acute respiratory distress syndrome survivors may be no worst than in other ICU survivors. Intensive Care Med 2003; 29: 1744–1750. doi:10.1007/s00134-003-1808-x

98.

Hodgson

Hayes

Everard

, et al. Long-term quality of life in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for refractory hypoxaemia. Crit Care 2012; 16: R202. doi:10.1186/cc11811

99.

Honselmann

Buthut

Heuwer

, et al. Long-term mortality and quality of life in intensive care patients treated for pneumonia and/or sepsis: predictors of mortality and quality of life in patients with sepsis/pneumonia. J Crit Care 2015; 30: 721–726. doi:10.1016/j.jcrc.2015.03.009

100.

Korosec Jagodic

Jagodic

Podbregar

Long-term outcome and quality of life of patients treated in surgical intensive care: a comparison between sepsis and trauma

. Crit Care 2006; 10: R134. doi:10.1186/cc5047

101.

Nisula

Vaara

Kaukonen

, et al. Six-month survival and quality of life of intensive care patients with acute kidney injury. Crit Care 2013; 17: R250. doi:10.1186/cc13076

102.

Oeyen

Benoit

Annemans

, et al. Long-term outcomes and quality of life in critically ill patients with hematological or solid malignancies: a single center study. Intensive Care Med 2013; 39: 889–898. doi:10.1007/s00134-012-2791-x

103.

Orwelius

Lobo

Teixeira Pinto

, et al. Sepsis patients do not differ in health-related quality of life compared with other ICU patients. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2013; 57: 1201–1205. doi:10.1111/aas.12164

104.

Pavoni

Gianesello

Paparella

, et al. Outcome predictors and quality of life of severe burn patients admitted to intensive care unit. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med 2010; 18: 24. doi:10.1186/1757-7241-18-24

105.

Stergiannis

Katsoulas

Fildissis

, et al. Health-related quality of life and rehabilitation cost following intensive care unit stay in multiple trauma patients. J Trauma Nurs 2014; 21: 115–121. doi:10.1097/JTN.0000000000000042

106.

Thompson

Taylor

Jan

, et al. Health-related outcomes of critically ill patients with and without sepsis. Intensive Care Med 2018; 44: 1249–1257. doi:10.1007/s00134-018-5274-x

107.

Timmers

Verhofstad

Moons

, et al. Long-term quality of life after surgical intensive care admission. Arch Surg 2011; 146: 412–418. doi:10.1001/archsurg.2010.279

108.

Yende

Austin

Rhodes

, et al. Long-term quality of life among survivors of severe sepsis: analyses of two international trials. Crit Care Med 2016; 44: 1461–1467. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000001658

109.

Rivat

Ballantyne

The dark side of opioids in pain management: basic science explains clinical observation. PR9 2016; 1: e570. doi:10.1097/PR9.0000000000000570

110.

Wolf

Messana

Wilson

, et al. 91 Impact of intermittent versus continuous infusion of fentanyl after rapid sequence intubation on intensive care unit delirium. Ann Emerg Med 2017; 70: S37. doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2017.07.116

111.

Wanzuita

Poli-de-Figueiredo

Pfuetzenreiter

, et al. Replacement of fentanyl infusion by enteral methadone decreases the weaning time from mechanical ventilation: a randomized controlled trial. Crit Care 2012; 16: R49. doi:10.1186/cc11250

112.

Al-Qadheeb

Roberts

Griffin

, et al. Impact of enteral methadone on the ability to wean off continuously infused opioids in critically ill, mechanically ventilated adults: a case–control study. Ann Pharmacother 2012; 46: 1160–1166. doi:10.1345/aph.1R132

113.

Jacobi

Fraser

Coursin

, et al. Clinical practice guidelines for the sustained use of sedatives and analgesics in the critically ill adult. Crit Care Med 2002; 30: 119–141. doi:10.1097/00003246-200201000-00020

114.

Martyn

JAJ

Mao

Bittner

EA.

Opioid tolerance in critical illness. Ingelfinger JR, ed. N Engl J Med 2019; 380: 365–378. doi:10.1056/NEJMra1800222

115.

Donohue

Kennedy

Seymour

, et al. Patterns of opioid administration among opioid-naive inpatients and associations with postdischarge opioid use: a cohort study. Ann Intern Med 2019; 171: 81. doi:10.7326/M18-2864

116.

Witcraft

Gonzales

Seung

, et al. Continuation of opioid therapy at transitions of care in critically ill patients. J Intensive Care Med 2021; 36: 879–884. doi:10.1177/0885066620933798

117.

Memis

Inal

Kavalci

, et al. Intravenous paracetamol reduced the use of opioids, extubation time, and opioid-related adverse effects after major surgery in intensive care unit. J Crit Care 2010; 25: 458–462. doi:10.1016/j.jcrc.2009.12.012

118.

Greenberg

Murphy

Avram

, et al. Postoperative intravenous acetaminophen for craniotomy patients: a randomized controlled trial. World Neurosurg 2018; 109: e554–e562. doi:10.1016/j.wneu.2017.10.021

119.

Young

Saxena

Bellomo

, et al. Acetaminophen for fever in critically ill patients with suspected infection. N Engl J Med 2015; 373: 2215–2224. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1508375

120.

Cantais

Schnell

Vincent

, et al. Acetaminophen-induced changes in systemic blood pressure in critically ill patients: results of a multicenter cohort study. Crit Care Med 2016; 44: 2192–2198. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000001954

121.

Oberhofer

Skok

Nesek-Adam

Intravenous ketoprofen in postoperative pain treatment after major abdominal surgery. World J Surg 2005; 29: 446–449. doi:10.1007/s00268-004-7612-0

122.

Yang

Young

Schermer

, et al. Use of ketorolac is associated with decreased pneumonia following rib fractures. Am J Surg 2014; 207: 566–572. doi:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2013.05.011

123.

Bernard

Wheeler

Russell

, et al. The effects of ibuprofen on the physiology and survival of patients with sepsis. The Ibuprofen in Sepsis Study Group. N Engl J Med 1997; 336: 912–918. doi:10.1056/NEJM199703273361303

124.

Groth

Droege

Connor

, et al. 48: Effects of ketamine on pain, sedation, and delirium in the intensive care unit (ketamine-ICU study). Crit Care Med 2020; 48: 24. doi:10.1097/01.ccm.0000618692.88404.95

125.

Guillou

Tanguy

le, Seguin

, et al. The effects of small-dose ketamine on morphine consumption in surgical intensive care unit patients after major abdominal surgery. Anesth Analg 2003; 97: 843–847. doi:10.1213/01.ane.0000075837.67275.36

126.

Buchheit

Yeh

Eikermann

, et al. Impact of low-dose ketamine on the usage of continuous opioid infusion for the treatment of pain in adult mechanically ventilated patients in surgical intensive care units. J Intensive Care Med 2019; 34: 646–651. doi:10.1177/0885066617706907

127.

Pendleton

Stephenson

Goeden

, et al. Ketamine infusion for ICU sedation and analgesia: a multicenter evaluation. In: B48. Critical Care: Pain, Sedation, Delirium, ICU-Acquired Weakness, and Palliative Care. American Thoracic Society; 2020; A3582. doi:10.1164/ajrccm-conference.2020.201.1_MeetingAbstracts.A3582

128.

Perbet

Verdonk

Godet

, et al. Low doses of ketamine reduce delirium but not opiate consumption in mechanically ventilated and sedated ICU patients: a randomised double-blind control trial. Anaesth Crit Care & Pain Med 2018; 37: 589–595. doi:10.1016/j.accpm.2018.09.006

129.

Wang

Belley-Coté

Burry

, et al. Clonidine for sedation in the critically ill: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit Care 2017; 21: 75. doi:10.1186/s13054-017-1610-8

130.

Herr

Sum-Ping

STJ

England

ICU sedation after coronary artery bypass graft surgery: dexmedetomidine-based versus propofol-based sedation regimens. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 2003; 17: 576–584. doi:10.1016/s1053-0770(03)00200-3

131.

Pandey

Bose

Garg

, et al. Gabapentin for the treatment of pain in Guillain–Barré syndrome: a double-blinded, placebo-controlled, crossover study. Anesth Analg 2002; 95: 1719–1723. doi:10.1097/00000539-200212000-00046

132.

Pandey

Raza

Tripathi

, et al. The comparative evaluation of gabapentin and carbamazepine for pain management in Guillain–Barré syndrome patients in the intensive care unit. Anesth Analg 2005; 101: 220–225. doi:10.1213/01.ANE.0000152186.89020.36

133.

Moskowitz

Garabedian

Hardin

, et al. A double-blind, randomized controlled trial of gabapentin vs. placebo for acute pain management in critically ill patients with rib fractures. Injury 2018; 49: 1693–1698. doi:10.1016/j.injury.2018.06.002

134.

Pesonen

Suojaranta-Ylinen

Hammarén

, et al. Pregabalin has an opioid-sparing effect in elderly patients after cardiac surgery: a randomized placebo-controlled trial. Br J Anaesth 2011; 106: 873–881. doi:10.1093/bja/aer083

135.

Joshi

Jagadeesh

AM.

Efficacy of perioperative pregabalin in acute and chronic post-operative pain after off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery: a randomized, double-blind placebo controlled trial. Ann Card Anaesth 2013; 16: 180–185. doi:10.4103/0971-9784.114239

136.

Thomas

Antigua

, et al. Continuous lidocaine infusion as adjunctive analgesia in intensive care unit patients. J Clin Pharmacol 2017; 57: 830–836. doi:10.1002/jcph.874

137.

Choi

Zamary

Barreto

, et al. Intravenous lidocaine as a non-opioid adjunct analgesic for traumatic rib fractures. Farag E, ed. PLoS ONE 2020; 15: e0239896. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0239896

138.

Masic

Liang

Long

, et al. Intravenous lidocaine for acute pain: a systematic review. Pharmacotherapy 2018; 38: 1250–1259. doi:10.1002/phar.2189

139.

Jung

Ottestad

Aggarwal

, et al. 982: Intravenous lidocaine infusion for management of pain in the intensive care unit. Crit Care Med 2020; 48: 470. doi:10.1097/01.ccm.0000633464.81931.28

140.

Capdevila

Ramin

Capdevila

Regional anesthesia and analgesia after surgery in ICU. Curr Opin Crit Care 2017; 23: 430–439. doi:10.1097/MCC.0000000000000440

141.

Nishimori

Ballantyne

Low

JHS.

Epidural pain relief versus systemic opioid-based pain relief for abdominal aortic surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006; 3: CD005059. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD005059.pub2

142.

Stundner

Memtsoudis

SG.

Regional anesthesia and analgesia in critically ill patients: a systematic review. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2012; 37: 537–544. doi:10.1097/AAP.0b013e3182625f1a

143.

O’Connell

Quistberg

Tessler

, et al. Decreased risk of delirium with use of regional analgesia in geriatric trauma patients with multiple rib fractures. Ann Surg 2018; 268: 534–540. doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000002929

144.

Pöpping

Elia

Van Aken

, et al. Impact of epidural analgesia on mortality and morbidity after surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Ann Surg 2014; 259: 1056–1067. doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000000237

145.

Westreich

Greenland

The Table 2 Fallacy: presenting and interpreting confounder and modifier coefficients. Am J Epidemiol 2013; 177: 292–298. doi:10.1093/aje/kws412

146.

Hernán

Brumback

Robins

JM.

Marginal structural models to estimate the causal effect of zidovudine on the survival of HIV-positive men. Epidemiology 2000; 11: 561–570. doi:10.1097/00001648-200009000-00012

147.

Hernán

MA.

Methods of public health research – strengthening causal inference from observational data. N Engl J Med 2021; 385: 1345–1348. doi:10.1056/NEJMp2113319

148.

Hernán

Robins

JM.

Using big data to emulate a target trial when a randomized trial is not available. Am J Epidemiol 2016; 183: 758–764. doi:10.1093/aje/kwv254

The complications of opioid use during and post–intensive care admission: A narrative review

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Characteristics of opioid use in the intensive care unit

Type of opioid

Dose of opioid

Short-term adverse effects of opioids in the intensive care unit

Delirium

Intensive care unit-acquired infection

Immunosuppression

Prolonged duration of ventilation

Gastrointestinal dysfunction

Acute opioid tolerance and opioid-induced iatrogenic withdrawal syndrome

Opioid-induced hyperalgesia

Long-term adverse effects of opioids in the intensive care unit

Persistent opioid use after the intensive care unit

Chronic post–intensive care unit pain

Strategies to minimise opioid use in the intensive care unit

Approaches to pain assessment and management

Approaches to analgesic pharmacotherapy

Intermittent versus continuous opioid infusions

Periprocedural analgesia

Opioid weaning protocols

Opioid rotation

Opioid prescriptions on discharge from the intensive care unit

Non-opioid adjuvant analgesics

Regional analgesia

Choice of sedatives

Future directions

Short-term effects of opioids

Long-term effects of opioids

Methodological and statistical approaches

Conclusion

Footnotes

Author contribution(s)

Acknowledgements

Declaration of conflicting interests

Funding

ORCID iD

References