Remote buprenorphine-naloxone initiation as an essential service for people with chronic pain and opioid dependence during the COVID-19 pandemic: Case reports, clinical pathways, and implications for the future
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many health care professions have reacted swiftly to the COVID-19 pandemic. In-person care has been ramped down and telemedicine/telehealth has been thrust to the forefront of clinical care. For people living with chronic pain and often concomitantly dealing with opioid-related issues, this is a time of great stress. With population-wide movements to shelter in place, people living with pain are more isolated, more stressed, and more vulnerable to mental health concerns like depression and anxiety that can increase pain-related suffering. This article presents two case reports of patients struggling with chronic pain and opioid dependence in which a telemedicine-based buprenorphine-naloxone conversion was chosen as a treatment option by two Canadian programs: The Transitional Pain Service at the Toronto General Hospital in Toronto, Ontario, and The Opioid Deprescribing Program in Calgary, Alberta. Both cases presented highlight the use of telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic and suggest that there will be substantial need for these services well beyond the apex of the crisis. A buprenorphine-naloxone home induction protocol is presented and we provide insight into important lessons learned regarding the appropriate selection of patients with chronic pain struggling with opioid use disorder for buprenorphine-naloxone conversion. The provision of health care during the COVID-19 pandemic has rapidly forced practitioners to evolve novel health care practices, and these changes will have long-term implications.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".