• Chronic Pain Management and Opioid Misuse: A Public Health Concern (Position Paper)

    Executive Summary

    The intertwined public health issues of chronic pain management and the risks of opioid use and misuse continue to receive national attention. Family physicians find themselves at the crux of the issue, balancing care of people who have chronic pain with the challenges of managing opioid misuse and abuse. Pain is one of the oldest challenges for medicine. Despite advances in evidence and understanding of its pathophysiology, chronic pain continues to burden patients in a medical system that is not designed to care for them effectively. Opioids have been used in the treatment of pain for centuries, despite limited evidence and knowledge about their long-term benefits, but there is a growing body of clear evidence regarding their risks. As a result of limited science, external pressures, physician behavior, and pharmacologic development, we have seen the significant consequences of opioid overprescribing, misuse, diversion, and dependence.

    In the face of this growing crisis, family physicians have a unique opportunity to be part of the solution. Both pain management and dependence therapy require patient-centered, compassionate care as the foundation of treatment. These are attributes that family physicians readily bring to their relationships with patients. While our currently fragmented health care system is not well-prepared to address these interrelated issues, the specialty of family medicine is suited for this task. The American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) is actively engaged in the national discussion on pain management and opioid misuse. Committed to ensuring that our specialty remains part of the solution to these public health crises, the AAFP challenges itself and its members at the physician, practice, community, education, and advocacy levels to address the needs of a population struggling with chronic pain and/or opioid dependence.

    Call to Action

    The AAFP is committed to addressing the dual public health crises of undertreated pain and opioid misuse/abuse at both the national and grassroots levels. To this end, the AAFP has formed a cross-commission advisory committee to address the multiple issues involved. Through its efforts with other physician and medical organizations, as well as governmental entities, the AAFP is committed to being a leader in promoting the advancement of safe pain management and opioid prescribing, and in addressing the growing burden of opioid dependence. The AAFP therefore challenges itself and its members to action in the following areas:

    Physician Level

    • Deliver patient-centered, compassionate care to patients struggling with chronic pain and/or opioid dependence
    • Collaborate with other health care professionals to deliver the multidisciplinary care that patients struggling with chronic pain and/or opioid dependence need
    • Critically appraise currently available evidence and guidelines on the treatment of chronic pain and opioid dependence
    • Acknowledge risk factors for opioid overdose and misuse in patients who have chronic pain and in patients currently being treated with opioids, and appropriately use prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs), periodic drug screens, treatment agreements, and related tools to combat misuse
    • Consider obtaining a Drug Addiction Treatment Act of 2000 (DATA 2000) waiver to deliver office-based opioid treatment (OBOT)
    • Provide access to and information about appropriate antidotes (e.g. naloxone) for patients who are at highest risk of an intentional or unintentional overdose

    Practice Level

    • Create a nonjudgmental and culturally proficient environment for patients struggling with chronic pain and/or opioid dependence
    • Review current practice patterns and protocols, considering the Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB) and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines for the treatment of chronic pain
    • Identify key partners and community resources for collaboration in the treatment of chronic pain and opioid dependence
    • Encourage and enable physicians to use protocols for medication-assisted treatment (MAT) to address opioid dependence within the clinic population
    • Work with local, regional, and/or national practice-based research networks to develop science that will best inform the care of patients who have chronic pain and the appropriate management of opioid use, especially in vulnerable populations

    Community Level

    • Develop partners within the medical neighborhood to ensure successful multidisciplinary delivery of care for patients struggling with chronic pain and/or opioid dependence
    • Work with local organizations and patient advocacy groups to develop community-based solutions to chronic pain and opioid dependence, with the goal of destigmatizing the issues surrounding both
    • Inform, educate, and facilitate development of overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) programs in the community
    • Increase collaboration among community behavioral health services, nurse care management services, other psychosocial support services, and primary care in order to support community providers of MAT
    • Expand cross-coverage opportunities for solo, waivered family physicians working in rural and underserved areas, including the possible short-term use of nonwaivered physicians to provide coverage

    Education Level

    • Align residency program training to deliver evidence-based information on best practices in the management of chronic pain and opioid dependence
    • Expand current continuing medical education (CME) offerings to deliver evidence-based information on best practices in the management of chronic pain and opioid dependence, including the appropriate use of naloxone
    • Expand the opportunities for DATA 2000 waiver training during residency. For mentoring and training purposes, this will ideally include faculty members at each residency site who are trained in MAT. Sites where waivered family medicine faculty members are not available should utilize collaborative teaching and mentoring arrangements with other providers.
    • Expand the availability of waivered training courses at national, state, and regional CME meetings, as well as the availability of online and other alternative models of waiver training
    • Develop a list of DATA 2000-waivered family physicians across the United States who are willing to provide mentorship for newly waivered family physicians and residents, ideally with some form of reimbursement for their mentorship activities

    Advocacy Level

    • Work for adjustments in payment models to enable physicians to provide patient-centered, compassionate care in the treatment of chronic pain and opioid dependence and to appropriately compensate them for providing such care
    • Expand governmental and private insurance coverage of MAT in the primary care setting, with adequate reimbursement for the increased time, staff, and regulatory commitments associated with MAT
    • Expand the role of advanced practice nurses (APNs) and physician assistants (PAs) in providing MAT as part of a team supervised by a DATA 2000-waivered primary care physician
    • In states that lack appropriate laws, advocate for better access to naloxone, and appropriate Good Samaritan protections for prescribers and lay rescuers
    • Work with state and federal licensing boards, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), and the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) to destigmatize MAT, particularly in the setting of the community provider
    • Work with state and national partners to improve the functionality, utility, and interoperability of PDMPs, and develop best practices for their use and implementation
    • Expand governmental and private support of research into the management of chronic pain, as well as methods to better identify and manage opioid misuse. Particular attention should be paid to vulnerable populations who are at higher risk for undertreatment of pain and/or for opioid misuse.


    Chronic pain and opioid misuse are significant and interrelated health care issues that are important to our patients, the medical community, and society as a whole. A core tenet of the practice of medicine is to relieve suffering, yet the undertreatment of pain has been deemed a public health crisis by the National Academy of Medicine (NAM).1 The physician community struggles with uncertainties when managing a patient’s chronic pain in the face of an epidemic of opioid misuse, as well as the morbidity and mortality associated with overdose. When a family physician sits down with a patient who is seeking help, the fundamental goals of relieving suffering and avoiding harm can come into clear opposition.

    Sadly, our current health care system is poorly equipped to address the needs of a patient who has chronic pain and/or opioid dependence. Patients can feel abandoned in their care, such as when they are marked with the stigma of addiction, labeled as “drug seekers” by health care providers, or “fired” from medical practices for opioid misuse. No one disputes that chronic pain should be managed with a multidisciplinary approach, yet family physicians often do not have the resources or personnel to provide that approach. They must work within a fragmented health care system in which patients can obtain prescriptions from multiple sources and multiple physicians. Since family physicians treat the whole patient and not just a subset of diseases, they face the challenge of working with patients who have multiple comorbidities, which complicates both managing chronic pain and balancing competing priorities during the office visit. Furthermore, the payment structure for the system at large (and for medications in particular) often rewards a fast-track approach instead of the comprehensive and time-consuming processes required to deliver the most appropriate care to patients struggling with chronic pain and/or opioid dependence and opioid use disorder.

    Despite these challenges, family physicians must understand the history of managing chronic pain and opioid dependence, as well as the current science. They must also be prepared to be a key part of the solution. This position paper provides family physicians with critical information and calls them to action to address chronic pain and opioid dependence and opioid use disorder.

    Pain and Opioids: How Did We Get Here?
    Pain is one of the oldest medical problems, with a long history in medicine, religion, and social science. Recent history demonstrates that we still do not have a full understanding of chronic pain, leading us to ineffective and counterproductive pain management strategies.2 Opioid use for pain dates back to the 1800s. The use of opioids increased due to the need to treat devastating injuries sustained in warfare; opioid use was also affected by advancements in pain physiology, the discovery of endogenous endorphins and opioid receptors, and the development of synthetic opioids.3-5 Opioid pain relievers can effectively reduce pain, as demonstrated by multiple randomized trials.6 Unfortunately, almost all of these studies have lasted less than 16 weeks, and there are few data regarding the longer term effectiveness of opioids for chronic pain.7 On the basis of limited data, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)—using varying degrees of scrutiny—approved many of the current extended-release opioids.8 The result was a false sense of security in the physician community about the efficacy and safety of these medications to address the growing issue of chronic pain.8

    Chronic pain is common, with approximately 11% of the U.S. population reporting daily pain.9 In addition, pain is often more severe and more frequently undertreated in vulnerable subpopulations, including the elderly, racial/ethnic minorities, women, and socioeconomically challenged groups.1, 10 Efforts to address the significant morbidity of chronic pain led to an increased emphasis on the recognition and treatment of chronic pain. These efforts—which were highlighted by actions of the U.S. Congress, the National Academy of Medicine (NAM), and multiple professional organizations—focused on improving care, increasing research into pain and its management, and improving training of physicians who manage pain.1, 11, 12

    Current Issues with Opioid Misuse and Abuse
    Regular opioid use, including use in an appropriate therapeutic context, is associated with both tolerance and dependence. The presence of tolerance or dependence does not necessarily mean that an individual has an opioid use disorder. Tolerance is present when an individual needs to use more of a substance in order to achieve the same desired therapeutic effect. Dependence is characterized by specific signs or symptoms when a drug is stopped. “Opioid misuse” is a broad term that covers any situation in which opioid use is outside of prescribed parameters; this can range from a simple misunderstanding of instructions, to self-medication for other symptoms, to compulsive use driven by an opioid use disorder.13 “Abuse” is also a nonspecific term that refers to use of a drug without a prescription, for a reason other than that prescribed, or to elicit certain sensory responses.13

    While cause and effect is unclear, the fact that rates of opioid use increased at the same time that physicians were being criticized for their undertreatment of pain is probably not a coincidence. Efforts to improve pain control led to pain becoming the “fifth vital sign,” and physicians were encouraged to address pain aggressively. In 2012, the number of opioid prescriptions written (259 million) equaled the adult population of the United States.14 Despite the increase in opioid prescribing, similar increases have not been observed with other analgesics, including nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), acetaminophen, or other adjunctive nonopioid therapies, nor have we seen a concomitant change in the amount of pain that Americans report.15, 16

    Increasing rates of opioid misuse and abuse have become a prominent topic in medical, public health, and mainstream media. The reality is that this growing trend is largely related to misuse of prescription medications. Prescription opioids are second only to marijuana as the first illicit substance people try, with approximately 1.9 million new initiates per year.14 Sales of prescriptions opioids quadrupled between 1999 and 2014.17 Not surprisingly, the prescribing practices of physicians have come under scrutiny. It is estimated that one out of five patients who have noncancer pain is prescribed opioids.15 Family physicians have played a role in this rising trend; primary care providers are responsible for about half of the opioid pain relievers dispensed.15

    These increased prescribing practices have clearly contributed to the growing opioid epidemic. In 2014, almost 2 million Americans abused or were dependent on prescription opioids.18 In primary care settings, one in four people who receive prescription opioids chronically for noncancer pain struggles with opioid dependence.19 Every day, more than 1,000 people are treated in emergency departments for misusing prescription opioids.20 Concurrently, some of the challenges associated with obtaining prescription opioids, as well as cost issues, have led to a rise in heroin use.21, 22

    Probably the most concerning consequence is the rise in intentional and unintentional opioid overdoses, which lead to substantial morbidity and mortality. While most people who abuse opioids get them for free from a friend or relative, those at highest risk of overdose (defined as individuals who use prescription opioids nonmedically for 200 or more days a year) obtain opioids using their own prescriptions (27%), get them from friends or relatives for free (26%), buy them from friends or relatives (23%), or buy them from a drug dealer (15%).23 The ultimate source remains prescribed medications. At least half of all U.S. opioid overdose deaths involve a prescription opioid.24 Based on data from 1999 to 2014, risk factors for death from prescription opioid overdose included being between ages 25 and 54, being a non-Hispanic white, and being male.24 Other risk factors include concomitant use of multiple prescribed and illicit substances (especially benzodiazepines),25, 26 nicotine use, higher prescribed dosages, inappropriate prescribing procedures, methadone use, and having a history of substance abuse.27

    Opioids and the Management of Pain
    There are key differences between acute and chronic pain. Acute pain is a warning symptom that has a functional role in the immune system and resolves with tissue recovery. It is mediated by intact neural pathways and it can be, when needed, controlled with opioids.28 Chronic pain arises from a complex web of heterogeneous illnesses and injuries, and affects a patient physically, psychologically, and emotionally. Frequently, it is associated with undue social and functional consequences, leading to lost productivity, reduced quality of life, and social stigma. Not surprisingly, addressing chronic pain requires a comprehensive approach, with an emphasis on safe and compassionate patient-centered care; chronic pain usually cannot be managed by prescription therapy alone.1,29

    Recognizing this complexity, family physicians need guidance on how to best provide patient-centered, compassionate care. While guidelines and policy statements provide some assistance, the evidence available to support such recommendations and guidance is very limited. Previous guidelines have encouraged physicians to access and use specific resources, such as opioid risk assessment screeners,30 urine drug screening, standardized pain scales, and prescription drug monitoring databases.31, 32 Using these resources often adds time to already busy patient visits, so it is not surprising that many are not routinely used by physicians prescribing opioids for chronic pain.33 It is also worth noting that a report from the 2014 National Institutes of Health (NIH) Pathways to Prevention Workshop on the role of opioids in treatment of chronic pain stated that “evidence is insufficient for every clinical decision that a provider needs to make about the use of opioids for chronic pain.”8

    The Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB) developed a model policy to help state medical boards ensure the practice of both appropriate pain management and safe, appropriate opioid prescribing. This policy addresses key areas for medical boards, physicians, and patients with respect to the following: understanding of pain; patient evaluation and risk stratification; development of a treatment plan and goals; informed consent and treatment agreement; initiation of an opioid trial; ongoing monitoring and adaptation of the treatment plan; periodic drug testing; consultation and referral; discontinuation of opioid therapy; medical records; and compliance with controlled substance laws and regulations.34 Many states either have a medical board policy that is reflective of the FSMB’s model policy or are currently amending their medical board policy to reflect the model policy.

    In 2016, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) published the CDC Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain--United States, 2016,35 which addresses many of the elements of the FSMB’s model policy. This CDC guideline was based on an evidence review that found no studies that evaluated the effectiveness of long-term (one year or greater) opioid therapy versus placebo or nonuse with regard to pain, function, and quality of life.35 Instead, the CDC based most of its recommendations on a review of contextual evidence using inconsistent inclusion and exclusion criteria for different pain management therapies. Because of these inconsistencies in methodology, and because strong recommendations were made on the basis of low-quality or insufficient evidence, the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) did not endorse the guideline. However, the guideline does provide some useful information for family physicians; therefore, it was categorized as Affirmation of Value.36, 37

    While guidelines and policies are available to physicians, there is a substantial deficit in the peer-reviewed research necessary to form a reliable evidence base. In order to fill this gap, it is imperative that family physicians actively advocate for and engage in research opportunities on appropriate pain management strategies.

    Role of Family Medicine in Care of Patients with Opioid Use Disorders

    Screening for Opioid Abuse and Misuse

    Most guidelines recommend screening patients to determine risks of drug misuse and abuse and to mitigate those risks as much as possible. Screening is typically based on risk factors that can be identified through a thorough patient history, the use of prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs), and, on occasion, drug screening. Unfortunately, there are no risk assessment tools that have been validated in multiple settings and populations. Furthermore, cited risk factors, such as sociodemographic factors, psychological comorbidity, family history, and alcohol and substance use disorders,38 may lead to discriminatory practices that affect care for vulnerable populations. As a member of the American Medical Association (AMA) Task Force to Reduce Prescription Opioid Abuse, the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) encourages physicians to use their state PDMP.39 These electronic databases are used to track prescribing and dispensing of controlled prescription drugs; they can be used to obtain information on suspected abuse or diversion and to help identify patients at risk so they can benefit from early intervention.40


    Family physicians should be aware of the utility of naloxone in a harm-reduction strategy for combating opioid overdose. The use of naloxone as a reversal agent for opioid overdose is standard therapy for advanced emergency medical service (EMS) providers and in emergency departments. Increasingly over the last two decades, naloxone has been provided to lay people for use in an opioid overdose.41 While little high-quality data is available, naloxone consistently shows benefit in the studies that are available, whether used by nonmedical first responders42 or lay people.41, 43 The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports more than 26,000 opioid reversals by lay people from 1996 to 2014.41 Often, these opioid reversals are part of an overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) program. The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMSHA)44 and the AMA Task Force to Reduce Prescription Opioid Abuse45 are encouraging physicians to identify patients at higher risk of overdose (e.g., use of higher opioid doses, concomitant benzodiazepine use, respiratory disease) and to provide them with naloxone. Most, but not all, states provide for increased layperson access to naloxone, and many have Good Samaritan provisions for prescribers and lay people.45

    Medication-Assisted Treatment

    Medication-assisted treatment (MAT) of opioid and heroin dependence has existed for more than five decades46 and involves some form of opioid substitution treatment. Originally, only methadone (an opioid agonist) was available, but now clinicians have buprenorphine (a partial agonist used alone or in combination with naloxone) and naltrexone (an opioid antagonist with both oral and extended-release injectable formulations) as pharmacologic options for MAT. In addition, adjunctive medications such as clonidine, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory medications (NSAIDs), and others are used in the treatment of specific opioid withdrawal symptoms.47 Prior to the Drug Addiction Treatment Act of 2000 (DATA 2000), medications for the treatment of substance abuse were available only via federally approved opioid treatment programs (OTPs). In these programs, personnel specifically trained in addiction medicine dispense certain Schedule II medications (methadone and levo-alpha-acetylmethadol [LAAM]) on a daily basis. With passage of DATA 2000, qualified physicians can now get a waiver to prescribe or dispense approved Schedule III, IV, or V medications for the treatment of opioid dependence outside of an OTP.48

    With the increase in opioid misuse and the passage and implementation of DATA 2000, various federal and state authorities and professional organizations have produced guidelines to help providers treat opioid use disorders.47, 49-51 Since 2001, SAMHSA has provided the Federal Guidelines for Opioid Treatment Programs, which outlines specific recommendations for the administrative and organizational structure and function of an OTP.51 SAMHSA also published Clinical Guidelines for the Use of Buprenorphine in the Treatment of Opioid Addiction, which outlines the elements of office-based opioid treatment (OBOT) utilizing buprenorphine.49 The American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM) guideline for treatment of opioid use disorders describes a comprehensive strategy for management that encompasses elements of OTPs and OBOT.47 Similar to the SAMHSA guidelines, it details the initial assessment and evaluation of the patient who has opioid use disorder, offers recommendations for managing opioid withdrawal, and describes and contrasts all of the available pharmacologic options for treatment of opioid use disorder. It concludes with a discussion of psychosocial therapy to be used in conjunction with pharmacologic treatments, and provides guidance in the management of various special populations (e.g., pregnant women and adolescents).

    Under the DATA 2000 legislation, qualified physicians—including primary care physicians—can apply to SAMHSA for a waiver that allows them to treat patients who have opioid use disorder with buprenorphine in the office setting.52 To get such a waiver, a physician needs to meet specific criteria (Table 1).

    Table 1. Criteria For Physicians to Obtain DATA 2000 Waiver to Provide OBOT

    • Be licensed to practice in the state in which the prescriber will be working
    • Have an active Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) registration to prescribe Schedule III, IV, or V medications
    • Have completed an eight-hour training course in the treatment and management of patients who have opioid use disorder (available in live and online/ webinar formats)
    • Supply documentation of successful completion of required training to SAMHSA

    The waiver process allows a resident in training to get a waiver as long as the resident holds an unrestricted medical license and the appropriate DEA registration. Once SAMHSA verifies that the information submitted by the candidate is complete and valid, the DEA issues a special identification number that must be included along with the regular DEA number on all buprenorphine prescriptions for opioid treatment. In the first year after successful completion of waiver certification, the physician can manage up to 30 patients with buprenorphine. After the first year, the physician can submit a request to treat up to 100 patients per year. Under a proposal submitted by President Barack Obama in March 2016, the maximum number of patients that a qualified buprenorphine provider can treat would increase to 200 per year.53

    As of the most recent statistics, only about 2% of all U.S. physicians (4% of primary care physicians) have a valid DATA 2000 waiver, with even fewer actively prescribing MAT.54 Even if all of the waivered physicians prescribed MAT to the fullest extent possible, the workforce would only be able to treat 1.4 million of the patients who have a diagnosis of opioid dependence. Table 2 lists some barriers to obtaining and utilizing the waiver and providing OBOT.54


    Table 2. Barriers to Providing OBOT

    • Lack of adequate funding; neither governmental nor private insurers adequately reimburse providers for all the costs associated with MAT in the office setting.
    • Lack of institutional support for prescribing MAT
    • Lack of cross-covering providers in the group or community setting when the MAT provider needs to take leave
    • Lack of psychosocial support services in the community
    • Concerns about the possibility of office auditing visits by the DEA
    • Confidentiality rules that limit the integration of care for patients with substance use disorders into primary care
    • Perceived increased scrutiny that providers face when prescribing MAT
    • Increased care coordination and patient management requirements associated with MAT
    • Lack of MAT training opportunities in residency
    • Lack of MAT mentors and subspecialty backup

    Despite these barriers, OBOT represents a critical opportunity for family physicians to address the opioid abuse epidemic. By working to reduce these barriers, the AAFP encourages family physicians to obtain a waiver and incorporate MAT into their practice.

    AAFP Efforts to Tackle the Opioid Abuse Epidemic


    The American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) recognizes the vital role that family physicians and other primary care clinicians play in the appropriate management of pain. To this end, the AAFP has developed policies, programs, and partnerships to advocate for and educate family physicians and the community. The AAFP’s policy55 on substance abuse outlines the organization’s support for training family physicians on the proper assessment, referral, and treatment of chronic pain. The AAFP also supports continued research into evidence-based guidelines for treatment of chronic pain. The AAFP supports implementation and use of prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) and greater physician input into pain management regulation and legislation.55 In conjunction with the Association of Departments of Family Medicine (ADFM), the Association of Family Medicine Residency Directors (AFMRD), and the Society of Teachers of Family Medicine (STFM), the AAFP supports appropriate training for pain management and has developed guidance for teaching residents how to care for patients who have chronic pain.56 Through its maintenance of certification process, the American Board of Family Medicine (ABFM) offers a self-assessment module (SAM) in pain management, as well as a certificate of added qualifications (CAQ) in pain medicine and hospice and palliative medicine.57

    Education and REMS

    Since its inception in 1947, the AAFP has been committed to promoting and maintaining high standards in family medicine, and promoting the improvement of the health of the public. This is demonstrated by the dual role the AAFP plays in the continuing medical education (CME) community as an accredited CME provider, the first of three national standard-setting, credit-granting systems. While the AAFP opposes mandatory CME for physicians on opioid prescribing,58 it strongly supports educating its members on effective and evidence-based pain management through CME and non-CME activities. The AAFP has offered several courses in risk evaluation and mitigation strategies (REMS). Additionally, the AAFP develops and provides multiple certified CME activities to address the topic of pain for its members. These CME activities are available in live, online, and enduring formats, which allows for increased access by members. The AAFP will continue to support family physicians to enhance their knowledge, competence, and performance when treating patients who have pain; it will also continue to provide CME to address the abuse, misuse, and safety of opioid prescribing.

    Resources and Commitment

    The AAFP collaborates with numerous external organizations on issues pertaining to opioids; these organizations include the American Medical Association (AMA), the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), the State Pain Policy Advocacy Network (SPPAN), and the American Academy of Pain Medicine (AAPM). The AAFP has a prominent role on the steering committee of the Providers’ Clinical Support System (PCSS), which is sponsored by the American Academy of Addiction Psychiatry (AAAP). The PCSS provides training modules on pain management and medication-assisted treatment (MAT). Additionally, the AAFP joined 26 other medical associations in the AMA Task Force to Reduce Prescription Opioid Abuse. This task force was formed in 2014 to identify best practices for combating opioid abuse and to implement these practices across the country. The goals of the task force are to increase registration and use of PDMPs by physicians; enhance education on effective, evidence-based prescribing of opioids; reduce the stigma of pain and substance use disorder; enhance comprehensive assessment and treatment of pain; increase access to treatment for substance use disorder; and expand access to naloxone in communities.39 With other members of the AMA Task Force and a number of other public- and private-sector partners, the AAFP joined the White House and President Obama to address the nation's epidemic of opioid abuse and heroin use by increasing education on opioid prescribing.

    The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) has updated its National Pain Strategy, which makes recommendations for improving pain management in the United States by addressing six key areas: population research; prevention and care; disparities; service delivery and payment; professional education and training; and public education and communication. The report also highlights opportunities to reduce the overreliance on opioid prescribing. Importantly, the strategy calls for better evidence and more research on pain management.59 The AAFP supports the National Pain Strategy, which outlines the essential elements of a nationwide strategy and is in line with the AAFP’s own position.

    The AAFP provides its members with tools and resources for education, advocacy, and patient care. These resources include a chronic pain management toolkit, continuing medical education, office-based tools, and resources for community engagement, advocacy, and science and education. The AAFP also has formed a member advisory panel that comprises commission members and subject matter experts. This panel will provide input on and support for the AAFP’s goals and initiatives related to opioids and pain management.


    Effective pain management and care of patients with substance use disorders require patient centeredness and compassion, which are hallmarks of family medicine. The AAFP is committed to ensuring that the specialty of family medicine is a central component of the solutions to ongoing issues with the health care system and the growing public health crisis. The recommendations and resources outlined in this paper are provided to encourage family physicians to take action on all levels to address the needs of a population struggling with chronic pain and/or opioid dependence, and to facilitate family physicians’ efforts.


    1. Institute of Medicine Committee on Advancing Pain Research Care and Education. Relieving pain in America: A blueprint for transforming prevention, care, education, and research. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2011.
    2. Sabatowski R, Schäfer D, Kasper SM, Brunsch H, Radbruch L. Pain treatment: a historical overview. Curr Pharm Des. 2004;10(7):701-716.
    3. Balant LP, Balant-Georgia AE. Milestones in clinical pharmacology. Opium and its derivatives. Clin Ther. 1992;14(6):846-848; discussion 845.
    4. Levinthal CF. Milk of paradise/milk of hell--the history of ideas about opium. Perspect Biol Med. 1985;28(4):561-577.
    5. Meed SD, Kleinman PM, Kantor TG, Blum RH, Savarese JJ. Management of cancer pain with oral controlled-release morphine sulfate. J Clin Pharmacol. 1987;27(2):155-161.
    6. Furlan A, Chaparro LE, Irvin E, Mailis-Gagnon A. A comparison between enriched and nonenriched enrollment randomized withdrawal trials of opioids for chronic noncancer pain. Pain Res Manag. 2011;16(5):337-351.
    7. Chou R, Deyo R, Devine B, et al. The effectiveness and risks of long-term opioid treatment of chronic pain. Rockville, MD: Agency of Healthcare Research and Quality; 2014. Evidence Report/Technology Assessment No. 218.
    8. Reuben DB, Alvanzo AA, Ashikaga T, et al. National Institutes of Health Pathways to Prevention Workshop: the role of opioids in the treatment of chronic pain. Ann Intern Med. 2015;162(4):295-300.
    9. Nahin RL. Estimates of pain prevalence and severity in adults: United States, 2012. J Pain. 2015;16(8):769-780.
    10. Green CR, Baker TA, Smith EM, Sato Y. The effect of race in older adults presenting for chronic pain management: a comparative study of black and white Americans. J Pain. 2003;4(2):82-90.
    11. Decade of Pain Control and Research, S.3163, 106th Cong. (2000).
    12. Public policy statement on the rights and responsibilities of health care professionals in the use of opioids for the treatment of pain: a consensus document from the American Academy of Pain Medicine, the American Pain Society, and the American Society of Addiction Medicine. Pain Med. 2004;5(3):301-302.
    13. Brady KT, McCauley JL, Back SE. Prescription opioid misuse, abuse, and treatment in the United States: an update. Am J Psychiatry. 2016;173(1):18-26.
    14. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Results from the 2012 national survey on drug use and health: summary of national findings. Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration; 2013.
    15. Daubresse M, Chang HY, Yu Y, et al. Ambulatory diagnosis and treatment of nonmalignant pain in the United States, 2000-2010. Med Care. 2013;51(10):870-878.
    16. Chang HY, Daubresse M, Kruszewski SP, Alexander GC. Prevalence and treatment of pain in EDs in the United States, 2000 to 2010. Am J Emerg Med. 2014;32(5):421-431.
    17. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Vital signs: overdoses of prescription opioid pain relievers---United States, 1999--2008. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2011;60(43):1487-1492.
    18. Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality. National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2014. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research 2016.
    19. Boscarino JA, Rukstalis M, Hoffman SN, et al. Risk factors for drug dependence among out-patients on opioid therapy in a large US health-care system. Addiction. 2010;105(10):1776-1782.
    20. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Highlights of the 2011 Drug Abuse Warning Network (DAWN) findings on drug-related emergency department visits. Rockville, MD: 2013. Accessed June 9, 2016.
    21. Jones CM, Logan J, Gladden RM, Bohm MK. Vital signs: demographic and substance use trends among heroin users - United States, 2002-2013. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2015;64(26):719-725.
    22. National Institute of Drug Abuse. Abuse of prescription pain medications risks heroin use. 2016. Accessed June 9, 2016.
    23. Jones CM, Paulozzi LJ, Mack KA. Sources of prescription opioid pain relievers by frequency of past-year nonmedical use United States, 2008-2011. JAMA Intern Med. 2014;174(5):802-803.
    24. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Prescription opioid overdose data. 2016. Accessed June 9, 2016.
    25. Jones CM, Lurie P, Woodcock J. Addressing prescription opioid overdose: data support a comprehensive policy approach. JAMA  2014;312(17):1733-1734.
    26. Jann M, Kennedy WK, Lopez G. Benzodiazepines: a major component in unintentional prescription drug overdoses with opioid analgesics. J Pharm Pract. 2014;27(1):5-16.
    27. Bohnert AS, Ilgen MA, Trafton JA, et al. Trends and regional variation in opioid overdose mortality among Veterans Health Administration patients, fiscal year 2001 to 2009. Clin J Pain. 2014;30(7):605-612.
    28. Berland D, Rodgers P. Rational use of opioids for management of chronic nonterminal pain. Am Fam Physician. 2012;86(3):252-258.
    29. Washington State Agency Medical Directors' Group. Interagency guideline on opioid dosing for chronic non-cancer pain: an educational aid to improve care and safety with opioid therapy. 3rd Ed. 2015.  Accessed June 9, 2015.
    30.  Chou R. 2009 Clinical Guidelines from the American Pain Society and the American Academy of Pain Medicine on the use of chronic opioid therapy in chronic noncancer pain: what are the key messages for clinical practice? Pol Arch Med Wewn. 2009;119(7-8):469-477.
    31. Nuckols TK, Anderson L, Popescu I, et al. Opioid prescribing: a systematic review and critical appraisal of guidelines for chronic pain. Ann Intern Med. 2014;160(1):38-47.
    32. Webster LR, Webster RM. Predicting aberrant behaviors in opioid-treated patients: preliminary validation of the Opioid Risk Tool. Pain Med. 2005;6(6):432-442.
    33. Meltzer EC, Hall WD, Fins JJ. Error and bias in the evaluation of prescription opioid misuse: should the FDA regulate clinical assessment tools? Pain Med. 2013;14(7):982-987.
    34. Federation of State Medical Boards. Model policy on the use of opioid analgesics in the treatment of chronic pain. 2013.http://www.fsmb.org/Media/Default/PDF/FSMB/Advocacy/pain_policy_july2013.pdf Accessed June 9, 2016.
    35. Dowell D, Haegerich TM, Chou R. CDC guideline for prescribing opioids for chronic pain - United States, 2016. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2016;65(1):1-49.
    36. American Academy of Family Physicians. Opioid prescribing for chronic pain. Accessed June 9, 2016.
    37. American Academy of Family Physicians. AAFP endorsement of evidence-based clinical practice guidelines from external organizations. 2014. Accessed June 9, 2016.
    38. Sehgal N, Manchikanti L, Smith HS. Prescription opioid abuse in chronic pain: a review of opioid abuse predictors and strategies to curb opioid abuse. Pain Physician. 2012;15(3 Suppl):Es67-92.
    39. American Medical Association. The American Medical Associaton Task Force to Reduce Prescription Opioid Abuse. Accessed June 9, 2016.
    40. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs). Accessed June 9, 2016.
    41. Wheeler E, Jones TS, Gilbert MK, Davidson PJ. Opioid overdose prevention programs providing naloxone to laypersons - United States, 2014. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2015;64(23):631-635.
    42. Rando J, Broering D, Olson JE, Marco C, Evans SB. Intranasal naloxone administration by police first responders is associated with decreased opioid overdose deaths. Am J Emerg Med. 2015;33(9):1201-1204.
    43. Walley AY, Xuan Z, Hackman HH, et al. Opioid overdose rates and implementation of overdose education and nasal naloxone distribution in Massachusetts: interrupted time series analysis. BMJ. 2013;346:f174.
    44. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Naloxone. Accessed June 9, 2016.
    45. AMA Task Force to Reduce Opioid Abuse. Help save lives: increase access to naloxone. Chicago, Ill: 2015. Accessed June 9, 2016.
    46. Dole VP, Warner A. Evaluation of narcotics treatment programs. Am J Public Health Nations Health. 1967;57(11):2000-2005.
    47. Kampman K, Jarvis M. American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM) national practice guideline for the use of medications in the treatment of addiction involving opioid use. J Addict Med. 2015;9(5):358-367.
    48. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Drug Addiction Treatment Act of 2000. Accessed June 9, 2016
    49. Center for Substance Abuse Treatment. Clinical guidelines for the use of buprenorphine in the treatment of opioid addiction. Treatment Improvement Protocol (TIP) Series 40. Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration; 2004. DHHS Publication No. (SMA) 04-3939. Accessed June 9, 2016.
    50. Center for Substance Abuse Treatment. Medication-assisted treatment for opioid addiciton in opioid treatment programs. Treatment Improvement Protocol (TIP) Series 43. Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration; 2005. DHHS Publication No. (SMA) 12-4214. Accessed June 9, 2016.
    51. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Federal guidelines for opioid treatment programs. Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration; 2015. DHHS Publication No. (SMA) PEP15-FEDGUIDEOTP. Accessed June 9, 2016.
    52. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Buprenorphine Waiver Management. 2016. Accessed June 9, 2016.
    53. Fact sheet: Obama administration announces additional actions to address the prescription opioid abuse and heroin epidemic [press release]. Washington, DC: The White House, Office of the Press Secretary; March 29, 2016. Accessed June 9, 2016.
    54. Center for Substance Abuse Treatment, Division of Pharmacologic Therapies. 2014 Buprenorphine Summit. September 22-23, 2014. Report of Proceedings. Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Administration; 2014. Accessed June 9, 2016.
    55. American Academy of Family Physicians. Substance abuse and addiction (revised and approved May 2016). Accessed June 9, 2016.
    56. American Academy of Family Physicians. Recommended curriculum guidelines for family medicine residents: chronic pain management. AAFP reprint no. 286. Leawood, KS: American Academy of Family Physicians; 2015. Accessed June 9, 2016.
    57. American Board of Family Medicine. Certificates of Added Qualifications (CAQs). Accessed June 9, 2016.
    58. American Academy of Family Physicians. Drugs, opposition to mandatory education for drug prescribing (revised and approved May 2016). Accessed June 9, 2016.
    59. Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health. National Pain Strategy: A comprehensive population health-level strategy for pain. Accessed June 9, 2016.

    (July 2012 BOD) (2016 COD)