• Cynthia Kear, Tom McKeithen, and Sheila Robertson.
• a California Academy of Family Physicians , San Francisco , California , USA.
• Subst Abus. 2017 Apr 1; 38 (2): 145-149.

BackgroundThe Collaborative for REMS (Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy) Education (CO*RE) includes 13 organizations that provide REMS Program Companies (RPC) grant-supported accredited education on extended-release and long-acting (ER/LA) opioid therapy. This report summarizes results of a survey designed to investigate the impact of participant criteria and to better understand the roles and preferences of continuing medical education/continuing education (CME/CE) participants.MethodsIn April 2015, the authors made an online survey available to an estimated 10,000 clinicians who had completed a CO*RE CME/CE activity since 2013. The purpose of the survey was to (1) examine possible reasons learners may underreport prescribing status, (2) investigate ways in which learners engage in nonprescribing roles relevant to reducing adverse patient outcomes, and (3) determine the acceptability of a potential test-based learning tool that allows participants with mastery to test out in lieu of participating in 2- to 3-hour education.ResultsFindings revealed that there was little confusion or reluctance by learners to answer questions about Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) licensing and whether they prescribed opioids in the past year. REMS "prescriber" education covers opioid management responsibilities that are distributed among team members who play critical nonprescribing roles in reducing serious adverse outcomes from both ER/LA and immediate-release (IR) opioids. Seventy-three percent of study participants would favor a test-based learning tool should future circumstances warrant it.ConclusionThe authors concluded the likelihood of underreporting is small, but there is an opportunity to clarify license and prescribing questions; opioid management responsibilities are distributed among nonprescribing team members who play roles in reducing adverse outcomes from both ER/LA and IR opioids, who would therefore benefit from REMS education; and clinicians favor a test-based learning tool, should future circumstances warrant it. These findings could have implications for planning future ER/LA opioid REMS curriculum and for setting and interpreting training goals for the US Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) ER/LA opioid REMS program.

18 keywords...

hide…