The Anesthesiology Community's Approach to Opioid- and Anesthetic-abusing Personnel Time to Change Course

Department of Anesthesiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Anesthesiology (Impact Factor: 6.17). 12/2008; 109(5):762-4. DOI: 10.1097/ALN.0b013e31818a3814
Source: PubMed
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Substance use disorder (SUD) among anesthesiologists and other physicians poses serious risks to both physicians and patients. Formulation of policy and individual treatment plans is hampered by lack of data regarding the epidemiology and outcomes of physician SUD. To describe the incidence and outcomes of SUD among anesthesiology residents. Retrospective cohort study of physicians who began training in United States anesthesiology residency programs from July 1, 1975, to July 1, 2009, including 44,612 residents contributing 177,848 resident-years to analysis. Follow-up for incidence and relapse was to the end of training and December 31, 2010, respectively. Cases of SUD (including initial SUD episode and any relapse, vital status and cause of death, and professional consequences of SUD) ascertained through training records of the American Board of Anesthesiology, including information from the Disciplinary Action Notification Service of the Federation of State Medical Boards and cause of death information from the National Death Index. Of the residents, 384 had evidence of SUD during training, with an overall incidence of 2.16 (95% CI, 1.95-2.39) per 1000 resident-years (2.68 [95% CI, 2.41-2.98] men and 0.65 [95% CI, 0.44-0.93] women per 1000 resident-years). During the study period, an initial rate increase was followed by a period of lower rates in 1996-2002, but the highest incidence has occurred since 2003 (2.87 [95% CI, 2.42-3.39] per 1000 resident-years). The most common substance category was intravenous opioids, followed by alcohol, marijuana or cocaine, anesthetics/hypnotics, and oral opioids. Twenty-eight individuals (7.3%; 95% CI, 4.9%-10.4%) died during the training period; all deaths were related to SUD. The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the cumulative proportion of survivors experiencing at least 1 relapse by 30 years after the initial episode (based on a median follow-up of 8.9 years [interquartile range, 5.0-18.8 years]) was 43% (95% CI, 34%-51%). Rates of relapse and death did not depend on the category of substance used. Relapse rates did not change over the study period. Among anesthesiology residents entering primary training from 1975 to 2009, 0.86% had evidence of SUD during training. Risk of relapse over the follow-up period was high, indicating persistence of risk after training.
    JAMA The Journal of the American Medical Association 12/2013; 310(21):2289-96. DOI:10.1001/jama.2013.281954 · 30.39 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Occupational health providers (OHPs) and other clinicians who assess readiness to work have a difficult task in assessing return to work for healthcare professionals (HCPs) with substance use disorders (SUDs). About 10 to 15 % of HCPs will misuse drugs or alcohol at some time in their career, yet they are often reluctant to seek help. This paper reviews the clinical challenges of assessing SUDs in HCPs, including risk factors, prognosis, and limited evidence base for work restrictions. Furthermore, ethical and legal challenges throughout the return to work process are reviewed for stakeholders such as HCPs with SUDs, OHPs, other providers, employers, and the public at large. Suggestions are made for stakeholders, particularly for OHPs and other providers, who are navigating this complex environment.
    Psychological Injury and Law 09/2013; 6(3):238-249. DOI:10.1007/s12207-013-9166-7
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This qualitative inquiry explored factors that protect recovering anesthetic opioid-dependent nurse anesthetists from relapse after their return to anesthesia practice. Practicing nurse anesthetists in recovery from potent opioids were recruited through online advertising and individually interviewed over the telephone. The interview consisted of open-ended questions that aided description of personal experience of individual factors. Content analysis of the interviews revealed an overarching theme of a commitment to the recovery process, which provided the foundational protective element against relapse. Within this context, two major thematic factors emerged: personal factors and external factors. Personal factors came from within the individual and included such features as removing the obsession to use, self-realization, inner strength, and seeing the future. External factors were external to the individual and described as time away from practice, state regulatory agency involvement, and talking with significant others. Although the Twelve-Step process was not a factor per se, it was credited by all participants as the structure on which their recovery was built. This process provided mechanisms for developing the motivation and learning the tools necessary to maintain their sobriety.
    Journal of Addictions Nursing 04/2014; 25(2):66-73. DOI:10.1097/JAN.0000000000000026 · 0.34 Impact Factor