AMA Opposed to ‘Blacklisting’ of Doctors Over Rx Opioids

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

The American Medical Association is hardening its opposition to public and private policies that seek to limit opioid prescribing. The AMA House of Delegates this week passed resolutions calling for prescribing guidelines to be amended to allow physicians to use their own clinical judgement to decide if higher doses of opioids are medically necessary. The AMA’s ruling body also called for an end to the “blacklisting” of doctors who prescribe high doses.

The AMA didn’t always feel this way about guidelines. When the CDC released its controversial opioid guideline in 2016, the AMA sent a letter to CDC Director Thomas Frieden that “applauded the CDC for treating the epidemic of opioid overdose deaths as a high priority.” And Patrice Harris, MD, a psychiatrist who chaired an AMA Task Force to Reduce Opioid Abuse, said the AMA was “largely supportive of the guidelines.”

Harris, who recently became the AMA President, now says the guidelines “have no basis in science.”

“Physicians can’t be expected to fight the epidemic with one hand tied behind their back, handicapped by policies that limit choices for patients and have no basis in science,” Harris said in a statement.


The AMA House of Delegates finally took a stand against the CDC guideline last November, when it passed resolutions opposing the “misapplication” of the guideline by pharmacists, insurers, pharmacy benefit managers, states and regulatory agencies.  

Although the 2016 guideline is voluntary, it has resulted in many patients being forcibly tapered to lower doses, cutoff entirely or even abandoned by their doctors – all under the guise of preventing opioid addiction and overdoses.

This week’s resolutions by the AMA’s ruling body went a step further, calling for an end to the “inappropriate use” of the CDC guideline to set dosing limits and blacklist physicians who exceed them.  

RESOLVED that our AMA support balanced opioid sparing policies that are not based on hard thresholds, but on patient individuality, and help ensure safe prescribing practices, minimize workflow disruptions, and ensure patients have access to their medications in a timely manner, without additional, cumbersome documentation requirements.

RESOLVED that our AMA oppose the use of “high prescriber” lists used by national pharmacy chains, pharmacy benefit manager companies or health insurance companies when those lists do not provide due process and are used to blacklist physicians from writing prescriptions for controlled substances and preventing patients from having their prescriptions filled at their pharmacy of choice.

RESOLVED that our AMA incorporate into their advocacy that clinical practice guidelines specific to cancer treatment, palliative care, and end-of-life be utilized in lieu of CDC’s Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain as per CDC’s clarifying recommendation.

The CDC’s so-called clarification came in a commentary published April 24 in The New England Journal of Medicine. Three authors of the guideline did not take any responsibility for the poor implementation of their recommendations, but acknowledged that “some policies and practices purportedly derived from the guideline have in fact been inconsistent with, and often go beyond, its recommendations.”

Nearly two months later, not a single word of the CDC guideline has been clarified or changed, and insurers, pharmacies and many states continue to enforce its voluntary recommendations as mandatory policy.

Doctors who prescribe high doses of controlled substances are also being blacklisted by the DEA and state medical boards, which routinely use prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs) to identify and target physicians who are considered “high prescribers.”

Federal prosecutors have also sent letters to hundreds of physicians warning them that their opioid prescribing practices could subject them to criminal prosecution — often without any evidence that their patients were harmed by the drugs.

What Next for CDC Opioid Guideline?

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

The pain community is reacting with a fair amount of skepticism to efforts by the CDC to address the widespread misuse of its 2016 opioid prescribing guideline.

A CDC commentary published Wednesday in The New England Journal of Medicine warns against the “misapplication” of the guideline, which has resulted in hard dosing limits, forced tapering and the medical abandonment of thousands of chronic pain patients.

Although the guideline strongly recommends that daily doses of opioids not exceed 90 MME (morphine milligram equivalent), the guideline’s three co-authors say their advice was misinterpreted and that the guideline “does not address or suggest discontinuation of opioids already prescribed at higher dosages.”

A CDC media statement this week also claimed “the guideline does not support abrupt tapering or sudden discontinuation of opioids.” 

That was surprising news to Rob Hale, a Missouri man with late-stage Ankylosing Spondylitis, a degenerative and incurable form of arthritis.  Like many other pain patients, Hale’s relatively high dose of opioid medication was significantly reduced soon after the guideline’s release.  As a result, he is now bedridden.

“This is amazing news, if they really intend to follow through with it,” said Hale in an email. “God, I hope this is the beginning of a turnaround in prescribing policies.  I just feel for the hundreds of us who gave up and took their lives or died as a result of the last 3 years of cruelty.”

Saving Face

Why the CDC is acting now is unclear. Reports of patient harm began circulating soon after the guideline’s release in March 2016, and have only accelerated as insurers, pharmacies, states and practitioners adopted the guideline as mandatory policy. In a recent PNN survey of nearly 6,000 patients, over 85 percent said the guideline has made their pain and quality of life worse. Nearly half say they have considered suicide.

“I regard this CDC statement to be an effort to save face and maintain political dominance on an issue into which CDC improperly inserted itself under the influence of Andrew Kolodny and PROP,” said patient advocate Richard “Red” Lawhern, referring to the founder of the anti-opioid activist group Physicians for Responsible Opioid Prescribing.

“The statement fails to engage with the underlying issues which render the Guidelines fatally flawed.  It fails to acknowledge the essential repudiation of the entire guideline concept by the American Medical Association, plus multiple prominent medical professionals.” 


“The CDC guidelines have been as harmful as predicted, and the silence over 3 years has been criminal. The ‘Who me?’ response is just as evil as the ignorant abuse of power that led to the crisis in the first place,” said Mark Ibsen, MD, a Montana physician whose license was suspended by the state medical board for “overprescribing” opioids. A judge overturned the board’s ruling.  

“Those who give a weak ‘mea culpa’ for misinterpretation of the guidelines are, in short, lying. The deaths of thousands of abandoned pain patients, including 6 of mine who lost access (to opioids), are on their hands,” Ibsen said. 

PNN asked a CDC spokesperson if the agency had received new information about patients being harmed by the guideline and received a vague response.  

“We have heard concerns from partners and stakeholders about policies and practices that are inconsistent with the 2016 Guideline and sometimes go beyond its recommendations. The misapplication of the Guideline can risk patient health and safety,” Courtney Lenard said in an email. “CDC authored this commentary to outline examples of misapplication of the Guideline, and highlight advice from the Guideline that is sometimes overlooked but is critical to safe and effective implementation of the recommendations.” 

The response was also vague when we asked if CDC would be directly contacting insurers, pharmacies and states to warn them about misapplying the guideline.

“CDC has engaged payers, quality improvement organizations, state health departments, and federal partners to encourage implementation of recommendations consistent with the intent of the Guideline,” said Lenard, citing a mobile app and a pocket guide to opioid tapering as examples of CDC outreach.

The agency also sent out a Tweet.

Lenard gave no indication that a revision of the guideline was imminent. She said the CDC was working with the Association of Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) to evaluate “new scientific evidence” about the benefits and harms of opioids.  

“Results of these reviews will help CDC decide whether evidence gaps have been addressed and whether the Guideline should be updated or expanded for chronic or acute pain prescribing,” Lenard wrote. 

Undoing the Damage

The American Medical Association – which took a stand against the “inappropriate use” of the guideline last year -- released a statement saying the CDC needed to work more closely with insurers.

“The guidelines have been misapplied so widely that it will be a challenge to undo the damage. The AMA is urging a detailed regulatory review of formulary and benefit design by payers and PBMs (pharmacy benefit managers),” said AMA President-elect Patrice Harris, MD.

“The CDC’s clarification underscores that patients with acute or chronic pain can benefit from taking prescription opioid analgesics at doses that may be greater than the guidelines or thresholds put forward by federal agencies, state governments, health insurance companies, pharmacy chains, pharmacy benefit managers and other advisory or regulatory bodies.”

Dr. Ibsen said the Drug Enforcement Administration was “the other elephant in the room” because it has weaponized the CDC guideline to demonize and prosecute doctors for prescribing high opioid doses. 

“Arresting and punishing doctors who treat the sickest pain patients. Civil asset forfeiture as used in dealing with criminal drug dealers. Equate physicians with a license to practice as equal to or below said criminal drug dealers,” said Ibsen, listing some of the tactics used by prosecutors.

“Charge physicians with one felony for every Rx they write, making absurdly dramatic charging documents and headlines against doctors who are left with no income or assets to defend themselves in a contaminated jury pool. Charge doctors with murder for prescribing medications to patients who fail to follow the directions.”

It’s not just the DEA. The National Association of Attorneys General recently declared that the dose and duration of opioid prescriptions should not be decided by doctors and that the CDC guideline should essentially be treated as law.

“As a matter of public safety, there is simply no justification to move away from the CDC Guideline to encourage more liberal use of an ineffective treatment,” warns a letter signed by 39 state and territory attorney generals. “As Attorneys General of states with high rates of prescription drug abuse among our youth, policy makers and prescribers must be encouraged to continue to pursue laws and practices that reduce the high volume of opioids in our communities.”

“The standard of care is now determined by prosecutors and juries,” says Ibsen.

AMA: ‘Inappropriate Use’ of CDC Guideline Should Stop

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

Two and a half years after the release of the CDC’s opioid prescribing guideline, the American Medical Association has finally taken a stand against the “misapplication” and “inappropriate use” of the guideline by insurers, pharmacists, federal regulators and state governments.

Although the guideline is voluntary and only intended for primary care physicians treating non-cancer pain, many pain patients have been forcibly tapered to lower doses, cutoff entirely or even abandoned by their doctors – all under the guise of preventing addiction and overdoses. The CDC has stood by and done nothing to correct the false portrayal of its guideline by insurance companies and pharmacies such as CVS.

The genie may be out of the bottle, but the AMA is now trying put it back in.

At its interim meeting in Maryland this week, the AMA House of Delegates adopted a series of resolutions that call for restraint in implementing the CDC guideline – particularly as it applies to the agency’s maximum recommend dose of 90mg MME (morphine equivalent units).

RESOLVED that our AMA affirms that some patients with acute or chronic pain can benefit from taking opioids at greater dosages than recommended by the CDC Guidelines for Prescribing Opioids for chronic pain and that such care may be medically necessary and appropriate.

RESOLVED that our AMA advocate against the misapplication of the CDC Guidelines for Prescribing Opioids by pharmacists, health insurers, pharmacy benefit managers, legislatures, and governmental and private regulatory bodies in ways that prevent or limit access to opioid analgesia.

RESOLVED that our AMA advocate that no entity should use MME thresholds as anything more than guidance, and physicians should not be subject to professional discipline, loss of board certification, loss of clinical privileges, criminal prosecution, civil liability, or other penalties or practice limitations solely for prescribing opioids at a quantitative level above the MME thresholds found in the CDC Guidelines for Prescribing Opioids.

“I was gratified to see these resolutions from AMA. This problem has been developing for some time, but really seems to have picked up steam over the past year, especially with respect to limits placed by pharmacy chains and insurers,” said Bob Twillman, PhD, Executive Director of the Academy of Integrative Pain Management.

“It would have been good to see this kind of statement when various entities first began misinterpreting and misapplying the CDC guideline, but I also understand the need to ensure that a problem develops before proposing a solution.”


“Great to see the AMA is finally stepping up to help bring common sense to the ill-conceived and frankly very harmful CDC guideline,” said Lynn Webster, MD, a pain management expert and past president of the American Academy of Pain Medicine. “Unfortunately too many people have already been a victim of CDC’s misguided attempt to address the opioid problem.” 

Guideline Not Mandatory

Missing from the resolutions is any recognition by the AMA that many of its own members – the organization represents over 200,000 physicians – have been lying to their patients or remain wilfully ignorant about the voluntary nature of the CDC guideline.  

“Earlier this year my doctor explained that he was required to reduce my pain medications. I was shocked. He explained that new opioid prescribing guidelines were requiring patients to be reduced across the board, regardless of their condition,” pain patient Liz Ott wrote in a recent guest column. 

“My current doctor is currently weaning me off the last of my opioids, stripping me of the last tiny bit of medication that have any effect on my pain,” wrote Michael Emelio in another guest column. “After talking to half a dozen pain management doctors this year, I believe that they have been so programmed by the anti-opioid propaganda that many believe they're doing the right thing and fail to realize the true extent of the suffering they have caused.”

“A pharmacist decided to cut my opioid medication in half without permission from me or my doctor. It took 3 months to fix this and find a pharmacy to fill my medication,” wrote Deann Goudy in her guest column.

Even the AMA’s president had a patient – a man with advanced prostate cancer – who couldn’t get an opioid prescription filled by a suspicious pharmacist.

“The pharmacist suspected my patient was a drug seeker and did not alert me that his prescription was denied. My patient, a very proud man, felt shamed and didn’t know what to do. So, he went home to be as tough as he felt he could be. That worked for about three days and then he tried to kill himself,” Barbara McAneny, MD, said in a speech this week at the AMA meeting.

“My patient suffered, in part, because of the crackdown on opioids… When I visited my patient in the hospital as he was recovering from his suicide attempt, I apologized for not knowing his medication was denied. I felt I had failed him.”

The AMA has failed pain patients in the past. In 2016, just months after the release of the CDC guideline,  the AMA House of Delegates recommended that pain be removed as a “fifth vital sign” in professional medical standards – a move that pain management experts warned against because it could lead to delays in getting a diagnosis and treatment.  

AMA delegates that year also passed a resolution urging The Joint Commission to stop requiring hospitals to ask patients about the quality of their pain care. Medicare has a funding formula that requires hospitals to prove they provide good care through patient satisfaction surveys, but critics contended that questions about pain promoted opioid prescribing. They offered no credible evidence to support their claims, but the pain questions were soon dropped from patient satisfaction surveys.

AMA: Patients Being Harmed by Rx Opioid Crackdown

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

Patients are being harmed by the crackdown on opioid pain medication and increasingly “burdensome” requirements for prior authorization, according to the president of the American Medical Association.

“The pendulum swung too far when pain was designated a vital sign, and now we are in danger of it swinging back so far that patients are being harmed. We need to use our expertise in patient care to change the dialogue to appropriate pain control,” said Barbara McAneny, MD, at a weekend meeting of the AMA. 

McAneny, who is a practicing oncologist in Gallup, New Mexico, shared the story of a patient with advanced prostate cancer who was in severe pain.  

“Metastatic prostate cancer in your bones hurts, and one day he called me to say that his pain regimen wasn’t holding him. So, I increased the dosage of his opioids from two per day to three and of course he ran out early,” McAneny said. “So, I called his primary care physician who agreed to write a prescription for his very large amount of time-release morphine.” 

When the patient tried to get his prescription filled, the pharmacist called the insurer for prior authorization and was denied. The pharmacist also checked the prescription drug monitoring program (PDMP) and found that the patient had multiple prescriptions written by McAneny and other doctors.  



“The pharmacist suspected my patient was a drug seeker and did not alert me that his prescription was denied. My patient, a very proud man, felt shamed and didn’t know what to do. So, he went home to be as tough as he felt he could be. That worked for about three days and then he tried to kill himself,” said McAneny.  

“Fortunately, his family found him in time, and the emergency medicine physician was able to save his life. He spent a week in the hospital and finally we got his pain back under control, on the exact regimen I had prescribed him as an outpatient.”  

Ironically, the insurer paid for the patient’s ambulance and hospital bills without any prior authorization. And the CDC’s “voluntary” opioid guidelines — which have been widely adopted by insurers — don’t even apply to cancer patients.

“Like you, I share the nation’s concern that more than 100 people a day die of an overdose. But my patient nearly died of an under-dose. This story illustrates the problems we all confront every day in our current dysfunctional health care system,” McAneny said. “The health plan does not have the chart, doesn’t know the patient, and basically countermanded my orders without even telling me using the prior authorization process. How have we let health plans determine the course of care? They call this quality? 

“My patient suffered, in part, because of the crackdown on opioids… When I visited my patient in the hospital as he was recovering from his suicide attempt, I apologized for not knowing his medication was denied. I felt I had failed him.”

McAneny cited a 2017 AMA survey, which found over 90% of doctors believed prior authorization led to delays in treatment and had a negative impact on patient outcomes. Nearly a third of doctors had to wait at least 3 business days for a prior authorization decision to be made.  

New prior authorization rules to be adopted by Medicare on January 1 could lead to delays in treatment for millions of elderly and disabled pain patients on high doses of opioids. Prescriptions over 200mg MME (morphine equivalent daily doses) will trigger a “hard edit” safety alert requiring pharmacists to consult with the prescribing physician before filling a prescription. Insurers will also be given greater authority to identify beneficiaries at high risk of addiction and to require they use “only selected prescribers or pharmacies.”

Pain Is a Vital Sign

By Roger Chriss, Columnist

Pain is a vital sign because it is vitally important. In fact, pain is what brings most people to a doctor, whether it’s their primary care physician or an emergency room doctor. And identifying the cause of the pain and figuring out how to address it is fundamental to medical care.

But pain cannot be objectively measured. And so some people trivialize or criticize its relevance.

“Unlike heart rate or blood pressure, there is no objective way to measure (pain). Doctors and nurses must depend on patients to report the intensity level of their pain, which provides an opening for addicts to abuse the system,” Hadley Manning recently wrote in an op/ed in The Oklahoman.  "Pain shouldn't be considered a vital sign."


The American Medical Association (AMA) also takes a dim view of pain, passing a resolution last year recommending that pain be removed as the “fifth vital sign” in professional medical standards.

"Just as we now know (the) earth is not flat, we know that pain is not a vital sign. Let's remove that from the lexicon," James Milam, MD, an AMA delegate told MedPage Today.

While it is true that there is no way to objectively measure pain, this is hardly unique to pain. After all, many health conditions that doctors deal with cannot be objectively measured:

  • In gastroenterology: appetite, nausea, or fullness
  • In neurology: numbness or tingling, muscle spasms, or loss of balance
  • In ophthalmology: double vision, light sensitivity, or blind spots
  • In otolaryngology: tinnitus, dizziness, or difficulty swallowing
  • In psychiatry: anxiety, depression, mania, or psychosis

This is part of why medicine is both an art and a science. Clinicians have to work directly with people and not just numbers and algorithms. Various instruments exist to formalize this process, including disability indexes for the neck and lower back, and a method for measuring adult depression.

Pain is included in many such instruments. And there are instruments that attempt to quantify pain. For instance, the Mankoski Pain Scale tries to characterize pain in a clinically useful way. The 0 to 10 scale goes from “Pain free” to “Can’t be ignored for more than 30 minutes” to “Pain makes you pass out.”

A number of medical conditions involve pain severe enough to be incapacitating or even crippling. Prevention Magazine put together a list of “The 10 Most Painful Conditions,” which includes kidney stones, postherpetic neuralgia, and cluster headaches.

To be clear, the abdominal pain of kidney stones is not just a “tummy ache,” but more like having your kidney sucked out through your navel. The pain of neuralgia is not just “numb toes and other woes,” but the agonizing burning that makes even a light touch a terrifying prospect. And a cluster headache is not a big “ice cream headache,” but an utterly incapacitating attack. You lay on the floor in a fetal position without even the mental resources to wonder if anyone will help.

Of course, pain can also be psychiatric in origin. The book Is It All In Your Head? True Stories of Imaginary Illness by neurologist Suzanne O’Sullivan, MD, describes how medically unexplained symptoms can be psychosomatic in nature but are nonetheless clinically real, and how a skilled specialist can make the distinction between organic and psychiatric causes of pain.

Thus, pain is a vital sign that cannot be ignored. It is the primary way that the human body communicates its needs and troubles. And it is the means by which people describe their medical problems.

Claims that patient complaints about pain create an “opening for addicts to abuse the system” ignore how healthcare works. Physicians don’t just look at a patient’s “pain score” and then write a prescription. They assess and evaluate the patient, and come to a diagnosis based on a combination of their clinical skills, lab work and testing.

And physicians sometimes err on the side of caution about patients’ descriptions of pain. The National Institutes of Health found that pain is often underestimated in women and racial minorities and often undertreated in socioeconomically disadvantaged groups.

While some patients may exploit the desire of a physician to help, it is also true that some physicians may ignore a patient’s legitimate need for help. Facile critiques that oversimplify the complexities of modern pain management diminish both the hard work of healthcare professionals and the suffering of people dealing with painful medical disorders.

Although pain is personal, subjective and not readily measured, it is very real. To diminish its importance because of an impractical standard of objectivity is to miss the fact that medicine is about relieving suffering.

Roger Chriss.jpg

Roger Chriss lives with Ehlers Danlos syndrome and is a proud member of the Ehlers-Danlos Society.

Roger is a technical consultant in Washington state, where he specializes in mathematics and research.

The information in this column should not be considered as professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. It is for informational purposes only and represents the author’s opinions alone. It does not inherently express or reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of Pain News Network.

Don’t Let the Media and Medical Profession Fool You

By Richard Oberg, MD, Guest Columnist

Chronic pain patients, like my wife, myself and others with abominable mistreatment, continue to lose the care they need while nothing is being done to address the real issues.

Drug abuse is up, young people are dying and the main culprits aren't prescription drugs, but something much more difficult to control. Heroin and illicit fentanyl, major causes of the increasing deaths, are becoming more widely available and, unfortunately, both of them are opioids.

The media routinely spouts about these “opioid deaths” while implying that prescription pain medication is what caused healthy people to take these illegal drugs. Why? Because they say so, that's why.

As with the recent 60 Minutes nonsense, they embellish the death of some high school quarterback, have a room full of grieving parents who say they had no idea their kids were drug addicts, add the fear that this can happen to you, and we the patients get to bear the brunt of this misdirected insanity.

The CDC addictionologist lobby and other federal agencies seem to have hoodwinked everyone into blaming chronic pain patients for this national problem. This is obvious and evident from countless stories of patient abuse no one seems to want to hear. The word is “scapegoat” and not a single person in power is responsible for anything – only we the patients are.

The CDC, government agencies and, quite frankly, the majority of physicians are NOT well-intended on this issue. They created this patient crisis that could have been avoided.

Don't let the medical profession that I was a part of for nearly four decades fool you. Physician sub-specialty organizations now exist for the benefit of physicians, not patients, and are mostly about maintaining control and money. Had these organizations stood up to defend patients against the CDC, and the ridiculous addictionology cohort of psychiatrists and anesthesiologists grooming their financial turf, we wouldn't be here right now. But they didn't, and a majority of physicians say they actually support the guidelines.

Don't buy the “they made me do it” line. It is misdirected nonsense, just as eliminating the pain scale to prevent any accountability is. Physicians don’t like accountability.

Inevitably, doctors still willing to write prescriptions for pain meds will attract greater numbers of chronic pain patients – and become easy prey for the DEA or their physician colleagues who don’t approve. Some of these doctors will become outliers in medical associations whose members tell them to stop because they don’t want to see or treat patients like us.

Why doesn't anyone ask where all the patients of physician practices that are being shut down go to? It's because no one in power cares, that's why. And then there’s the sheer ignorance or bigotry of many physicians who profess to be “pain management experts.”

The American Medical Association (AMA) once represented 75% of all licensed physicians and supported the best care for patients. 

Today, membership in the AMA has declined to just 15-20% of physicians, as subspecialty organizations gained power and patient care became driven by those isolated subspecialties. 

These organizations support the flow of wealth to their specialties better than the AMA ever could.  With increasing specialization, patient care became highly fragmented for those with complex diseases, yet there was no attempt or incentive to coordinate care. It became every patient for himself.

It is extremely rare to non-existent for a physician specialist to actually speak to another physician about your care, nor is much if any time spent reading another doctor’s evaluations. It’s just not fiscally expedient with current healthcare models. That is why you’re “re-evaluated” by every new specialist you see and have to reprove your illness over and over, often to skeptical stares.

The major problem with this is that subspecialties often “evaluate” you beyond their competence. For example, a rheumatologist is vastly superior to a psychiatrist if you have an autoimmune disease, but if you’re depressed and miserable because of an undiagnosed autoimmune disease and enter the care of a psychiatrist, the odds of ever getting an appropriate diagnosis are nil. Worse, they can make your life hell.

It’s just not what they do -- they make you fit their model – not the other way around. Whenever you get into the care of some subspecialist unlikely to have any idea what’s wrong with you, it inevitably leads to biases against you because physicians are just as bigoted about what they don’t understand as anyone else.

The attitude of most that my wife and I have encountered (despite both of us being physicians) suggests that most subspecialists get their information from the nightly news rather than medical journals outside of their specialty. Neurosurgeons think opioids are bad because that’s what they’ve heard. And they’d rather believe that than have you tell them otherwise.

From our point of view, it’s would almost be comical if it wasn't so infuriating.

Often, chronic pain patients are not sick enough to warrant hospital care (following acute care protocols), yet are too ill to be seen by outpatient physicians who aren’t reimbursed enough to spend additional time figuring you out or interacting with your other physicians.

And there are plenty of “well patient” visits providing better income – so why bother?

If this sounds bad, it’s because it is. For those who like their anesthesiologist pain care person, good for you. Many of us aren’t so fortunate. And someday you might not be either.

I’m not sure how much worse this will get, with patients losing access to opioids or seeing their doses cut, while overdose death rates continue to rise -- refuting CDC wisdom. Taking meds from chronic pain patients isn’t going to fix a problem caused by healthy people with illegal intentions.

Maybe some powerful mainstream media source will actually ask someone in power what's going on and not settle for anything other than a straight answer. But I wouldn’t hold my breath.

Take the unfortunate demise of Prince and how it has been reported. Whenever someone with career-induced injuries attempts to defeat aging by taking illicit opioid pain medication to continue performing 20 year old moves on a 57-year old body, bad things will result. It shouldn’t be rocket science to figure that out, yet I don’t recall a single media source saying that.

Instead, Prince has become another idiotic reason legitimate patients shouldn’t get opioid pain care – all because he intentionally misused it to extend his career. Because of the actions of a few, the vast majority will suffer. Not exactly stellar for the most expensive healthcare system in the world, is it?

Richard Oberg, MD, is disabled by psoriatic arthritis and no longer practices medicine. Dr. Oberg receives no funding from pharmaceutical companies. 

Pain News Network invites other readers to share their stories with us.  Send them to:

The information in this column should not be considered as professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. It is for informational purposes only and represents the author’s opinions alone. It does not inherently express or reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of Pain News Network.

AMA Defends Dropping Pain as Vital Sign

(Editor’s note: Last week we published a story on the American Medical Association’s decision to support the removal of pain as a “fifth vital sign” in professional medical standards – a move that some believe will make it harder for pain patients to be properly diagnosed and treated. Patrice Harris, MD, Chair of the AMA’s Board of Trustees, sent us the following letter objecting to how the AMA’s vital sign policy was characterized by PNN.)

By Patrice A. Harris, MD, Guest Columnist

The American Medical Association (AMA) unequivocally supports a patient’s right to receive the highest level of compassionate, comprehensive care for his or her pain.  It is unfortunate that the recent actions at the AMA House of Delegates were painted as anti-patient (“AMA Drops Pain as Vital Sign”), when the actual debate was focused entirely on how to ensure physicians have the necessary tools to deliver optimal care to our patients. 

Reducing the stigma of pain and advocating for comprehensive pain care are key recommendations from the AMA Task Force to Reduce Opioid Abuse – part of our multifactorial plan to ensure that balanced policies are in place to ensure patient’s access to care and promote the best evidence-based pain management practices, while reversing the nation’s opioid misuse, diversion, overdose and death epidemic.

When called for by a physician’s clinical judgment, this includes the use of opioid analgesics as a potential component of individual treatment plans.

Contrary to the claims in the article, however, our new policies complement and further our longstanding advocacy that emphasize the importance of treating each patient as an individual and tailoring care for that individual.



Pain satisfaction surveys, physician satisfaction surveys, even the Joint Commission’s Pain Care standards have not been shown to result in comprehensive improvements in pain treatment or protocols, or improved outcomes, but are clearly motivating forces for opioid prescribing. 

Patients with chronic pain deserve to benefit from the research and scientific approaches as envisioned by the National Pain Strategy, which the AMA strongly supports.  Not a single physician said, suggested, or hinted that anyone should “stop asking patients about their pain” as your recent article suggested.  Perpetrating this baseless, stigmatizing claim does your readers a tremendous disservice and does not reflect the opinions or practice of the nation’s physicians. 

We are well-aware that efforts to reduce the supply of opioids in the United States, without due consideration for unintended consequences and impact on chronic pain patients, have taken firm hold, and that many such patients have experienced disruption in their care and suffered. Many physicians at the AMA meeting decried the stigma that their patients experience. Others highlighted the audits and investigations by law enforcement among their colleagues.  And many noted the importance of treating all physical, psychosocial and behavioral aspects of pain. 

Furthermore, all discussed the importance of effective, evidence-based care, including the fact that vital signs are those that can be objectively measured and quantified. Identifying, treating and managing pain is central to medical practice, but it is not a readily quantifiable physiologic vital sign.  

We recognize that the pendulum has clearly swung too far. We know that the stigma of pain and opioid use has become pervasive, and we believe physicians and patient advocates must work together to restore balance.  But we can’t ignore the fear and stigma that pervades our society – and affects physicians and other health care professionals. We see (and experience) the increased scrutiny by law enforcement and government regulators.

In response, some physicians no longer treat chronic pain or prescribe opioids. But there are committed physicians in every city, town and state who provide the type of compassionate care that our patients need and deserve.  There are many examples of physicians doing all that is necessary to provide the type of complex, thoughtful care that chronic pain patients need. That is the vision we have for pain care in the United States.

We will, always stand up and speak out in support of patients who are in pain. We have done this countless times in Congress, with our state and specialty society colleagues, in front of the National Association of Counties, National Conference of Insurance Legislators, National Governors Association and many other leading organizations. 

We know all too well that pain is the number one reason patients come to us. We will continue to seek all avenues to provide the care our patients need – whether pharmacologic or non-pharmacologic – and insist that insurers cover the multimodal therapies required for effective management of chronic pain. 

The nation’s opioid misuse, overdose and death epidemic has harmed far too many, and the AMA is committed to working to ensure that patients with pain are not among those who must now become innocent bystanders in the regulatory response to this public health epidemic. To suggest anything less is to ignore the body of our advocacy and the mission that is central to our proud history.


Patrice A. Harris, MD, is Chair of the AMA Board of Trustees and Chair of the AMA’s Task Force to Reduce Opioid Abuse. A practicing psychiatrist based in Atlanta, Dr. Harris has served on the board of the American Psychiatric Association, as President of the Georgia Psychiatric Physicians Association and as Director of Health Services for Fulton County, GA.

Pain News Network invites other readers to share their stories with us.  Send them to:

The information in this column should not be considered as professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. It is for informational purposes only and represents the author’s opinions alone. It does not inherently express or reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of Pain News Network.

Pain Protestors: 5 Simple Ways to Stand Up

By Pat Akerberg, Columnist

It frustrates me that there’s such a huge gap between what I’d like to do and what I can actually do to protest how pain care has gone amok. 

The truth is I can’t talk without triggering unmerciful pain.  I can’t make lots of phone calls or present to audiences or groups anymore.  I can’t march, run or walk for any distance now.  Thanks to debilitating chronic pain, I can’t reliably commit my energies to much more than the daily challenges I face. 

Maybe you’re in the same place too? 

As discouraged underdogs, we want to change the lopsided fervor that’s trumping our critical need for safe and humane advancements in pain care.

I wish we could lead the charge, but in reality our compromised bodies often can’t keep up with what that requires. Starting from scratch is tempting, but that’s at cross-purposes with our limited capacities.    

Then I remember “the butterfly effect,” born out of physics and chaos theory.  It refers to a cumulatively large effect that a very small force may produce in a larger system over a period of time.  It postulates how the fluttering of a butterfly's wings in one part of the world may set off currents that will grow into a hurricane in another part of it.

We can’t predict or know when there will be enough pressure, conspiring events or cumulative conditions to bring about the butterfly effect for us.  But progress requires active involvement.

We have strength in numbers, but some patient advocates have called out pain sufferers, questioning where our support and voices of protest have been thus far.  That’s a fairly untapped opportunity.

If we want pain reform, it will take a critical mass of us calling for it.  Pragmatically, we can help build momentum and heighten the pressure for change quicker by supporting and working with current pain advocacy groups.

We have literally dozens of advocacy organizations, but ironically they lack organization.  Each represents a piece of the broader issue -- yet their efforts haven’t coalesced enough around a single goal or goals to gain substantial traction.

If you’re wondering what part you can play or where to put your limited energies, let’s look at some current opportunities.

Step #1

The oldest patient advocacy group, the American Chronic Pain Association, had a seat on a CDC advisory committee when the opioid prescribing guidelines were created.  But somehow that opportunity for active influence was reduced to a complicit check the box activity.

What can we do to call for better representation from such pain advocacy groups?  The well articulated comments that we write among ourselves could be leveraged to that end.  Copy, paste and send them to all national pain advocacy groups, starting with ACPA. Many of these organizations and their e-mail addresses are available by clicking here.  

Get involved.  Raise your concerns.  Urge all of their leaders to rally behind one unifying message for impact.  Ask them to recruit a spokesperson to give pain a face/voice (celebrity, athlete, or public/professional figure), devise ramped-up media and funding strategies, and enlist savvy lobbyists and lawyers.

If each of us would send out 5 letters, e-mails, or make 5 phone calls a week to a different advocacy group each week, we’d reach them all in just 8 weeks. 

Step #2

Have you heard of the LifeBOAT Act? Its legislation that would tax opioid pain medications, introduced by Sen. Joe Manchin (D) of West Virginia, and co-sponsored by Democratic Senators Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota, and Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, along with one independent, Angus King of Maine.

The legislation is a reverse Robin Hood version of robbery.  Lacking conscience, the LifeBOAT Act would take money from pain patients by punishing them for their medical misfortune.  In turn, an estimated $2 billion of our tax dollars would be given to favored addiction treatment centers to treat opioid addicts.

If you feel strongly about the injustice of this tax, email or call the senators’ offices with your reasoned, opposing comments:

Step #3

The American Medical Association (AMA) recently decided to pass the hot potato by voting in favor of efforts to remove pain as a vital sign in professional medical standards, as well as disconnecting patient satisfaction scores from questions involving pain care in hospitals.

If this setback for pain sufferers pushes your buttons, you can call the AMA at (800) 621-8335 and let them know how you fell.

Step #4

September is National Pain Month, a good time to contact your local media and get them to cover our side of the pain story.  Press kits are readily available from some advocacy groups for this purpose.

Step #5

Our small efforts can quicken the overall cumulative effect, while giving us a personal and purposeful outlet.  A few more examples include:

  • Join advocacy and social media groups (like Facebook) to understand their missions and volunteer for their initiatives
  • Urge advocacy groups to get more media coverage of our side of the pain/opioid story
  • Endorsing petitions sent out on our behalf
  • Spreading the word and soliciting the help of family and friends

The Scottish writer W. H. Murray wrote this about the power of commitment: 

“Until one is committed, there is hesitancy, the chance to draw back, always ineffectiveness. Concerning all acts of initiative (and creation) there is one elementary truth, the ignorance of which kills countless ideas and splendid plans: that the moment one definitely commits oneself, then Providence moves too. All sorts of things occur to help one that would never otherwise have occurred.”

By making a personal commitment on some level, each of us can contribute in ways that our physical limitations will allow. 

Pat Akerberg suffers from trigeminal neuralgia, a rare facial pain disorder. Pat is a member of the TNA Facial Pain Association and is a supporter of the Trigeminal Neuralgia Research Foundation.

Pat draws from her extensive background as an organizational effectiveness consultant who coached and developed top executives, mobilized change initiatives, and directed communications.

The information in this column should not be considered as professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. It is for informational purposes only and represents the author’s opinions alone. It does not inherently express or reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of Pain News Network.

AMA Drops Pain as Vital Sign

By Pat Anson, Editor

The nation’s largest medical society is recommending that pain be removed as a “fifth vital sign” in professional medical standards – a move critics say will make it even more difficult for pain sufferers to have their pain properly diagnosed and treated.

Delegates at the annual meeting of the American Medical Association in Chicago also passed several other resolutions aimed at reducing opioid prescribing and increasing access to addiction treatment. The AMA represents over 200,000 physicians in the U.S. and is very influential in setting public health policy.

The AMA’s new president said physicians played a key role in starting the so-called opioid epidemic by overprescribing pain medication, and now must do their part to end it.

“We have taken ownership of that, and physicians have taken ownership of being part of the solution,” AMA president Andrew Gurman, MD, told Modern Healthcare.

The AMA’s main “solution” to the opioid problem is to stop asking patients about their pain.

Pain was first recognized as the fifth vital sign in the 1990's, giving pain equal status with blood pressure, heart rate, respiratory rate and temperature as vital signs. The policy encourages healthcare providers to ask patients about their pain.

But critics say pain is not a vital sign, but more of a symptom, and cannot be measured like a patient's temperature or blood pressure. They also claim The Joint Commission,  a non-profit that accredits hospitals and other U.S. healthcare organizations, sets pain management standards too high, which contributes to opioid overprescribing.

"Just as we now know (the) earth is not flat, we know that pain is not a vital sign. Let's remove that from the lexicon," James Milam, MD, an AMA delegate said in MedPage Today. "Whatever it's going to take to no longer include pain as a vital sign ... Let's just get rid of the whole concept and try to move on."

“I am astounded that physicians don't believe we should assess pain on a regular and ongoing basis. That is exactly what removing pain as a vital sign means,” said Lynn Webster, MD, past president of the American Academy of Pain Medicine and vice president of scientific affairs at PRA Health Sciences.

Webster says dropping pain as a vital sign would setback pain care three decades.

“The problem is that too many physicians and policymakers equate assessing pain with giving opioids,” he said in an email to Pain News Network. “It appears that advocates for removing pain as a 5th vital sign are suggesting that if we just ignore pain then we won't have to deal with pain and opioid abuse will disappear. That is not only fantastical thinking, it is harmful to millions of people in pain.” 

"This is a very unfortunate decision, one that creates the very real possibility that we will see a decrement in the quality of pain care delivered in various institutions," warned Bob Twillman, PhD, Executive Director of the Academy of Integrative Pain Management.

"The Joint Commission standards say you need to assess pain in every patient; record the results of that assessment; provide some kind of treatment; re-assess to see if the treatment was effective; and teach staff how to manage pain. They do not say we should ask patients how much pain they have on a 0-10 scale and give them opioids until the pain level is 4 or less. Not asking about pain does not make pain go away, and it does not relieve healthcare providers of their moral and ethical obligation to treat that pain effectively."

AMA Adopts PROP Policies

AMA delegates also passed a resolution urging The Joint Commission to stop requiring hospitals to ask patients about the quality of their pain care. Medicare has a funding formula that requires hospitals to prove they provide good care through patient satisfaction surveys.  The formula rewards hospitals that are rated highly by patients, while penalizing those that are not. 

"Judging health care facilities on an overly subjective measure – that is, how well it is perceived that they treat pain -- is an overly simplistic approach to measuring clinical effectiveness," said AMA Board chair Patrice Harris, MD, in a statement.

Passing the two resolutions means the AMA has essentially adopted the same policies as Physicians for Responsible Opioid Prescribing (PROP), which is also lobbying the Joint Commission to weaken its pain management standards.  PROP is funded by Phoenix House, which runs a chain of addiction treatment centers. 

“At a time when millions of individuals in pain are under siege, the AMA has made it clear they are no friend to people in pain as they are opposed to being accountable for the pain care they provide, “ said David Becker, a patient advocate and social worker. “The AMA has become regressive, vision less, and hard-hearted toward the suffering that millions of people in pain endure on a daily basis. It is clear that the AMA is in need of moral reform.”

A recent survey of over 1,200 patients by Pain News Network and the International Pain Foundation found that many were dissatisfied with their pain treatment in hospitals. Over half rated the quality of their pain care as either poor or very poor, and over 80% said hospital staff are not adequately trained in pain management.

The AMA House of Delegates also passed a resolution calling for greater access to naloxone, which reverses the effects of an opioid overdose, and adopted a policy urging health insurers to increase coverage of non-opioid and non-pharmacological pain treatments.

Insurers must cover non-opioid and non-pharmacologic therapies that have proved effective. Insurers must take a broader view to give patients and physicians more choices," said Harris. “These policies will save lives. That's the bottom line.”

Doctors Have Mixed Reaction to CDC Guidelines

By Pat Anson, Editor

Although generally supportive of the CDC’s new opioid prescribing guidelines, some doctors are worried that patients who need opioid pain medications may lose access to them.

The voluntary guidelines, which discourage the prescribing of opioids for chronic pain, are intended for primary care physicians, but are widely expected to have a ripple effect throughout the healthcare system and on anyone who prescribes opioids.

"If these guidelines help reduce the deaths resulting from opioids, they will prove to be valuable. If they produce unintended consequences, we will need to mitigate them. They are not the final word," said Patrice Harris, MD, the board chair-elect of the American Medical Association, the nation’s largest medical group.

Like many other medical organizations that submitted public comments on the CDC guidelines, the AMA said it had concerns about the poor quality of scientific evidence supporting several of the recommendations. But the dozen guidelines are largely unchanged from a draft version that was released last September.

“We remain concerned about the evidence base informing some of the recommendations; conflicts with existing state laws and product labeling; and possible unintended consequences associated with implementation, which includes access and insurance coverage limitations for non-pharmacologic treatments, especially comprehensive care; and the potential effects of strict dosage and duration limits on patient care,” said Harris, who chairs the AMA Task Force to Reduce Opioid Abuse.

The lack of clinical evidence was also pointed out by other physicians.

 “There are few well-controlled clinical studies on opioid-prescribing methods for chronic pain. While the guidelines will be updated as new data become available, concerns may be raised that appropriate access to opioids could be negatively affected by federal guidelines based on admittedly weak data,”  wrote William Renthal, MD, of the Department of Neurology at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in an editorial in JAMA Neurology.

The head of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) said he was concerned the guidelines overstate the risks of opioids for women during pregnancy and after labor.

“ACOG agrees with the CDC that opioid should only be used for treatment of pain when alternatives are not appropriate or effective, but we also know that there are times, including during pregnancy and the postpartum period, when such use is both appropriate and safer than the alternative,” wrote ACOG president Mark DeFrancesco, MD. “Opioids may be needed to treat acute pain such as from cesarean delivery, kidney stones, sickle cell crisis or trauma in pregnancy, or as part of an established plan to treat problems associated with substance use disorders.”

DeFrancesco said the risk of birth defects and other problems caused by opioids was low and research demonstrating a connection was lacking.

“We are concerned that some of the CDC's patient education communications regarding use of opioids during pregnancy could discourage women from needed, appropriate care by overstating the risk of rare complications associated with opioid use during pregnancy and by understating the potential risk associated with opioid discontinuation, “ he said.

Two pediatric physicians are concerned the guidelines are only intended for patients 18 and older and do not address pain or opioid use by children.

“Unfortunately, the exclusion of children from the national discussion on pain is not new,” wrote Neil Schechter, MD, of Boston Children’s Hospital and Gary Walco, PhD, of Seattle Children’s Hospital in an editorial in JAMA Pediatrics. “Data clearly show that poorly treated pain in the young has deleterious long-term consequences on the development of pain systems and related responses, as well as psychological well-being. Furthermore, the long-term impact of pain on a developing organism may be quite different than on an adult and may suggest more aggressive, or at least different, interventions.”

Schechter and Walco urged the CDC to provide ”an explicit and definitive statement that this guideline should not be applied to those younger than 18 years of age for fear of untoward consequences.”

The Alliance for Balanced Pain Management (AfBPM), a coalition of patient groups and professional societies, said it was concerned about opioid dosing limits and the CDC recommendation that three days or less supply of opioids “often will be sufficient” to treat acute pain from surgery or trauma.

“When the CDC suggests the exact number of days and the precise dosing limit, the agency may be inserting itself too far, interfering with physician care of patients who live day to day with serious pain,” said Brian Kennedy, Alliance for Patient Access and a member of the AfBPM Steering Committee. “These guidelines mark a milestone in the national conversation about how we treat pain, both chronic and acute. Multimodal approaches to pain treatment make use of non-opioid treatments and have tremendous value for patients, but we shouldn’t tie physicians’ hands when it comes to treatment options.”

 “The data will never be perfect. The measures will never be perfect. The guidelines will never be perfect. And neither will clinicians and their performance,” wrote Thomas Lee, MD, of Press Ganey and Harvard Medical School in a JAMA editorial. “But by acknowledging these imperfections and trying to get better with the tools available, physicians can more effectively reduce the suffering of patients.”