U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

94–295 PDF 2016

S. HRG. 114–278 

VA OPIOID PRESCRIPTION POLICY, PRACTICE, 

AND PROCEDURES 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON VETERANS’ AFFAIRS 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

MARCH 26, 2015 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov 

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON VETERANS’ AFFAIRS 

JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia, Chairman 

JERRY MORAN, Kansas 

JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas 

DEAN HELLER, Nevada 

BILL CASSIDY, Louisiana 

MIKE ROUNDS, South Dakota 

THOM TILLIS, North Carolina 

DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska 

RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut, Ranking 

Member 

PATTY MURRAY, Washington 

BERNARD SANDERS, (I) Vermont 

SHERROD BROWN, Ohio 

JON TESTER, Montana 

MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii 

JOE MANCHIN III, West Virginia 

TOM BOWMAN, Staff Director 

JOHN KRUSE, Democratic Staff Director 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

MARCH 26, 2015 

SENATORS 

Page 

Isakson, Hon. Johnny, Chairman, U.S. Senator from Georgia ............................ 1 

Blumenthal, Hon. Richard, Ranking Member, U.S. Senator from Connecticut ... 2 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 3 

Cassidy, Hon. Bill, U.S. Senator from Louisiana .................................................. 22 

Tillis, Hon. Thom, U.S. Senator from North Carolina .......................................... 27 

Manchin, Hon. Joe, U.S. Senator from West Virginia .......................................... 29 

Boozman, Hon. John, U.S. Senator from Arkansas .............................................. 32 

WITNESSES 

Baldwin, Hon. Tammy, U.S. Senator from Wisconsin .......................................... 24 

Johnson, Hon. Ron, U.S. Senator from Wisconsin ................................................ 34 

Clancy, Carolyn, M.D., Interim Under Secretary for Health, Veterans Health 

Administration, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs; accompanied by 

Gavin West, M.D., Special Assistant for Clinical Operations; Michael 

Valentino, Chief Consultant of Pharmacy Benefits Management Services .... 4 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 6 

Response to posthearing questions submitted by: 

Hon. Bernard Sanders .................................................................................. 36 

Hon. Mazie Hirono ........................................................................................ 36 

Hon. Tammy Baldwin ................................................................................... 38 

Daigh, John D., Jr., M.D., C.P.A., Assistant Inspector General for Healthcare 

Inspections, Office of Inspector General, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs ....................................................................................................................... 10

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 12 

Alexander, G. Caleb, M.D., Co-Director, Center for Drug Safety and Effectiveness, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health ................................. 41 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 42 

Forster, Carol, M.D., Physician Director, Pharmacy & Therapeutics/Medication Safety, Mid-Atlantic Permanente Medical Group, Kaiser Permanente ... 43 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 45 

Response to posthearing questions submitted by Hon. Tammy Baldwin .... 58 

Gadea, John, Director, Drug Control Division, Connecticut Department of 

Consumer Protection ............................................................................................ 49 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 50 

APPENDIX 

Van Diepen, Louise R., MS, CGP, FASHP; prepared statement ......................... 61 

National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI); letter ............................................. 71 

Opioid Prescribing: A Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal of Guidelines 

for Chronic Pain; article ...................................................................................... 73 

The Prescription Opioid and Heroin Crisis: A Public Health Approach to 

an Epidemic of Addiction; report ........................................................................ 88 

(1) 

VA OPIOID PRESCRIPTION POLICY, 

PRACTICE, AND PROCEDURES 

THURSDAY, MARCH 26, 2015 

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON VETERANS AFFAIRS, Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:09 a.m., in room 

418, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Johnny Isakson, Chairman of the Committee, presiding. 

Present: Senators Isakson, Moran, Boozman, Cassidy, Tillis, 

Blumenthal, Brown, Hirono, and Manchin. 

Also present: Senators Johnson and Baldwin. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHNNY ISAKSON, 

CHAIRMAN, U.S. SENATOR FROM GEORGIA 

Chairman ISAKSON. I would like to call this meeting of the Veterans’ Affairs Committee to order. I want to thank our panelists for 

coming today to talk about a very important subject. Dr. Clancy, 

particularly, we welcome you again and thank you for all the help 

you have given the Committee and the Veterans Administration. 

We appreciate it very much. 

We have new rules for this Senate Committee this year. The 

Ranking Member and the Chairman will make opening remarks. 

Any members that want to make an opening remark can make it 

at the closing of the hearing, because we came to hear from those 

testifying, not from other members of the Senate. Yet, anybody is 

welcome to file a statement if they would like. 

We have two additional members that will sit in today, Senator 

Johnson and Senator Baldwin from the State of Wisconsin, which 

obviously has been a focal point of the over-prescription of opiates. 

I think it is important they have the opportunity to participate in 

the questioning of our witnesses. 

In the absence of opening statements, I will make a brief one. I 

will turn it over to our Ranking Member, Richard Blumenthal, 

then we will go straight to our distinguished panelists. 

Let me just say this: one of our panelists was going to be Dr. 

Tom Frieden or his designee from the CDC, which is doing an 

awful lot of work on the over-prescription of opiates. He could not 

be here, but we talked by phone for about 15 minutes prior to this 

hearing. There are two facts that he told me that I think make the 

point as to why this is an important hearing. 

One, 145,000 Americans have died in the last 10 years from an 

over-prescription or over-consumption of opiates, 145,000. The rate 

of prescription has become so great that there were enough preVerDate Mar 15 2010 12:35 Jun 14, 2016 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 Z:\ACTIVE\032615.TXT PAULIN
2 

scribed last year to provide one in every six Americans with a prescription for a year. That is 15 percent of the population with a 

year’s prescription. That is how much of a supply is coming out. 

Two, the CDC has recognized that it is such a prominent problem for health care in America that they have a task force working 

on guidelines for their prescriptions which will be published some 

time at the end of December for public comment, and hopefully by 

April 1 it will become policy of the CDC and the United States of 

America. 

This is a serious problem. Abuse and over-prescription of opiates 

is bad for the recipient, it is bad for the country, and it is a bad 

way to mask problems rather than treat problems, which is what 

we are all about in terms of the Veterans Administration. 

With that opening preface and the gravity of the situation, as illustrated by the statistics from the CDC, I am happy to welcome 

our Ranking Member for his opening remarks. 

Senator Blumenthal. 

STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, RANKING 

MEMBER, U.S. SENATOR FROM CONNECTICUT 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, 

our witnesses, all of our witnesses for being here today, and thank 

you to Senator Baldwin for sharing with us. I know of her very 

strong interest in the tragic experience, and very responsible involvement in making sure there is proper oversight at the Tomah 

facility in Wisconsin where an instance of over-prescription 

occurred. 

I want to thank the Chairman for having this hearing. I do not 

know of any topic that is more important in our VA health care 

system. We talk a lot about inadequate care in the sense of inadequate quantities of care. Here is an instance of excessive quantities of a particular drug doing absolutely horrific damage to our 

Nation’s heroes. 

We know that 22 veterans every day commit suicide, and many 

of them have suffered from over-prescription of opioids. Plain and 

simple, the current system is abysmally inadequate. It is like Swiss 

cheese, riddled with gaps and holes that permit and, in fact, enable, sometime even encourage over-prescription, deadly over-prescription of opioids. 

This Committee had a hearing during the last session on this 

very problem and I want this hearing to be different, to produce 

much more adequate action by the VA. We are in this issue together and I know that the VA shares our alarm and outrage, but 

action is absolutely necessary because over-prescription and overdose of opioids is an epidemic and a scourge in this country. 

I am going to ask that the remainder of my opening statement 

be put in the record, if there is no objection—— 

Chairman ISAKSON. Without objection. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL [continuing]. Because I do provide some of 

the other background. I just want to say I am grateful to John 

Gadea of our State Drug Control Division as well as Jonathan Harris, our Consumer Protection Commissioner for being here today. 

John Gadea and I have worked for many years on this topic. 

3 

I helped to lead the initiation in Connecticut of our prescription 

monitoring program which computerized prescriptions so as to keep 

track and prevent over-prescription and overdosing. This was in 

2006. It was started in 2008. So, this problem has been around for 

a long time. We cannot claim that it has snuck up on us or surprised us. 

This epidemic has been with us for years and years, and that is 

one reason, from my anger and astonishment, that the VA system 

is not better than it is. It is a problem that is nationwide. It is not 

limited to Tomah or any other single facility. 

I plan to begin efforts in Connecticut to make sure that the problem that existed in Tomah is not endemic to Connecticut as well. 

I am going to be commenting later on an invention that a young 

lady from Connecticut, Lily Zyszkowski told me about that she initiated, announced, and presented to the White House recently at 

the White House Science Fair called the Pill Minder, which is a 

microchip with touch sensors designed to remind people how to 

take their pills and to alert care givers when the pills have not 

been taken. 

A high school student has a system for helping to stop overdoses. 

Think of it for a moment. A high school student is telling us how 

to stop a problem that has been with us for more than a decade 

and has actually killed people. I am very proud of young inventors 

like Lily. I am grateful to our Chairman for having this hearing 

today and for his commitment. 

Needless to say, it is a bipartisan commitment to make sure that 

we end this scourge and that we make sure that this kind of systemwide problem is addressed and stopped and that we all take 

whatever action is necessary to do so. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. 

[The prepared statement of Senator Blumenthal follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, RANKING MEMBER

Prescription drug overdose has become an epidemic in this country. 

According to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, the hospitalization 

rate for overuse of opioids doubled between 1993 and 2012 and drug overdose death 

rates in the United States have more than tripled since 1990. 

This is a problem that requires the attention of policymakers from the local to 

the Federal levels, law enforcement as well as health care providers to come together and come up with creative ways to get ahead of the scourge of suffering and 

addiction that tragically all too often leads to death. 

There are few areas when drug addiction is more tragic than when veterans who 

have served our country return home with serious medical conditions, and seek 

treatment but end up in a spiral of pain and drug addiction. 

I’m pleased that Chairman Isakson has chosen to have another hearing on this 

important topic. Last year, I participated in then-Chairman Sanders’ hearing that 

focused on complementary and alternative treatments that could serve as an alternative to opioid treatment. 

It’s vital that we continue to address this topic within this Committee—and especially to discuss the best practices that are utilized within VA and throughout the 

private sector in partnership with state agencies. 

I look forward to hearing the testimony from VA as well as the Inspector General 

to inform us on the status of VA’s internal efforts at avoiding diversion and overprescription of painkillers. 

While the rates of opioid misuse have been steadily increasing, this is not altogether a new problem. I led a hearing on Prescription Drug Abuse as Attorney General of the state of Connecticut over a decade ago as we worked at putting a prescription drug monitoring system in place. It took many years to get the system set 

up, but Connecticut now has a very robust system and I am especially looking forward to hearing the testimony of John Gadea, Connecticut’s Director of State Drug 

Control Division. John and I have worked together for years and I value his insight 

4 

as well as his leadership and partnership in developing the Connecticut Prescription 

Monitoring and Reporting System. 

Veterans deserve to have the best systems in place for drug delivery as well as 

information on all options available to them. This includes having appropriate access to strong painkillers when necessary, but also access to screening systems, prevention tools and monitoring programs to ensure that treatment for pain does not 

lead to devastating pain, suffering and possibly death. 

While the problem is nationwide, VA must be at the forefront of making sure that 

its physicians, pharmacists and all of its health care team are committed to best 

practices in the area and each facility must be confident that doctors like the socalled ‘‘Candy Man’’ at the Tomah VA facility are identified and those practice corrected. I am pleased that my colleagues from Wisconsin are joining our conversation 

today to lend some insight into what their constituents in Wisconsin experienced 

and to assist us with our oversight in this area. 

I will turn back to the Chairman in a second, but I just want to share one last 

thing with the Committee. Earlier this week, I went to the White House for the 

White House Science Fair. We had two representatives from Connecticut there, and 

one of the young ladies, Lily Zyszkowski, was there with three inventions, one of 

which she calls the PillMinder. 

I am probably not doing justice to the invention, but the basic idea is that the 

PillMinder is a microchip with touch sensors designed to remind people to take their 

pills and to alert caregivers when the pills had been taken. Now I don’t know if Lily 

was thinking about how this could be used to prevent and deter drug overdoses, but 

that seems like a pretty interesting use of her invention to me. 

I bring this up today partially because I am very proud of young inventors from 

my state like Lily, but primarily because this is the type of smart, creative thinking 

that we need from all sectors to be able to properly tackle the problem of prescription drug abuse. I hope this hearing today will result in implementing more of the 

good ideas that I know are out there. 

Chairman ISAKSON. Thank you, Senator Blumenthal. 

We have our first panel, which consists of Dr. Carolyn Clancy, 

who is the interim Under Secretary for Health, Veterans Health 

Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs. Thank you for 

being here. 

You are accompanied, I believe, by Dr. West and Mr. Valentino. 

Is that correct? From the Inspector General’s Office, John—is it 

Daigh? 

Dr. DAIGH. Daigh, sir. 

Chairman ISAKSON. Daigh. Thank you. Dr. Daigh, is Assistant 

Inspector for Healthcare Inspections, Office of the Inspector General, Department of the Veterans Affairs. We will start with Dr. 

Clancy. 

STATEMENT OF CAROLYN CLANCY, M.D., INTERIM UNDER 

SECRETARY FOR HEALTH, VETERANS HEALTH ADMINISTRATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS; ACCOMPANIED BY GAVIN WEST, M.D., SPECIAL ASSISTANT FOR 

CLINICAL OPERATIONS, AND MICHAEL VALENTINO, CHIEF 

CONSULTANT OF PHARMACY BENEFITS MANAGEMENT 

SERVICES 

Dr. CLANCY. Thank you. Good morning, Chairman Isakson, 

Ranking Member Blumenthal, Members of the Committee. We appreciate the opportunity to participate in this hearing and to discuss VA’s pain management programs and the use of medications, 

particularly opioids, to treat veterans’ experiencing chronic pain. 

As the Chairman noted, I am accompanied by Dr. Gavin West and 

Mike Valentino. 

I would like to begin today by addressing the situation at Tomah. 

We are continuing to investigate the accusations at Tomah and we 

will keep you up to date on our findings. We will not tolerate an 

5 

environment where intimidation or suppression of concerns occurs 

and we welcome input from all employees and whistle blowers. 

If employee misconduct is identified, we will take the appropriate 

action and hold those responsible accountable. These investigations 

are an opportunity to get to the bottom of any issue so that moving 

forward, these issues are not repeated at Tomah or elsewhere in 

our system. 

Unfortunately, many of our Nation’s veterans suffer from chronic 

and acute pain. About 60 percent of returning veterans from the 

Middle East and more than 50 percent of older veterans live with 

some kind of chronic pain. The treatment of veterans’ pain is often 

very complex. 

Many of our veterans have survived severe battlefield injuries, 

some repeated, resulting in lifelong moderate to severe pain related 

to musculoskeletal problems and permanent nerve damage. This 

can impact not only their physical abilities, but also their emotional health and brain structures. 

Our efforts to reduce high dose opioid-prescribing have been successful initially in patients with uncomplicated chronic pain. However, veterans with complex chronic pain, such as those with one 

or more combinations of Traumatic Brain Injury, Post Traumatic 

Stress Disorder, and so forth may have relied on opioids for pain 

control. 

Tapering their doses to safer levels and instituting more comprehensive pain practices must go much more slowly and carefully 

to be both safe and to assure control of their suffering and qualityof-life. Veterans are particularly challenged by chronic pain, but as 

the Chairman mentioned, having heard from my former colleague, 

Tom Frieden, chronic pain is a national public health program. 

As identified in a study by the Institute of Medicine several 

years ago, 30 percent of the Nation’s adult population experience 

chronic pain. This country is now in the midst of an epidemic of 

misuse and overuse, as has been very clearly stated. The safe and 

appropriate use of opioids is particularly important for VA due to 

the number of veterans who have musculoskeletal injuries, nerve 

damage, and other conditions associated with their pain. 

Making positive changes in our prescribing practices has required providers and veterans to change the ways in which pain is 

managed, including other pain treatments available to rely less on 

opioids. These changes to pain management have to be done carefully and in a measured fashion to avoid the possibility that veterans will receive inadequate pain care. 

Our data and studies in the medical literature show that we are 

making progress in pain management. We have adopted several 

initiatives to advance the goal of safe, effective pain management. 

One of these is called our Opioid Safety Initiative, or OSI, which 

was first launched in August 2013. This combines feedback to providers and facilities on their prescribing practices with education 

and training to ensure that these medications are used safety, effectively, and judiciously. 

This initiative holds considerable promise for minimizing harm 

among veterans, promoting provider competence in promoting of 

veteran-centered, evidence-based, and coordinated multi-disciplinary pain care. 

6 

We recently produced a risk report for individual clinicians so 

that they could look at their entire panel of patients. Academic detailing, which is another one of our programs, combines the expertise of individuals specialized in pain management and prescribing. 

It has been tested in three of our networks with pretty big 

successes. 

Last year we encouraged all of our networks to adopt this approach, and about a third did. I am now mandating that all of our 

networks adopt this approach and have it fully implemented by the 

end of June 2015, and that they begin reporting quarterly data to 

the Under Secretary’s office by the end of September 2015. 

We are also leveraging the capabilities of our telehealth to extend specialty expertise in safe, effective pain management for clinicians who care for veterans in rural communities for whom travel 

to pain management experts can be pretty challenging. It has been 

particularly successful in Ohio. 

While we know our work to improve pain management programs 

and the use of these medications will never truly be finished, we 

believe we have been at the forefront of dealing with pain management and will continue to do so to better serve the needs of veterans. We appreciate this Committee’s support and encouragement 

in identifying and resolving challenges as we find new ways to care 

for veterans. 

On the subject of overdose, I will say that since May, we have 

instituted a program and prescribed 2,700, I believe, Narcan-prescribing kits, which we have a couple of samples to show you here. 

These can be administered by a family member, a friend, or a clinician to prevent an overdose if they suspect that has happened in 

someone close to them. And since last May, 41 people have a second chance at life. I wanted to make that all clear as well and look 

forward to your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Clancy follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DR. CAROLYN CLANCY, M.D., INTERIM UNDER SECRETARY

FOR HEALTH, VETERANS HEALTH ADMINISTRATION (VHA), DEPARTMENT OF VET- ERANS AFFAIRS (VA) 

Good morning, Chairman Isakson, Ranking Member Blumenthal, and Members of 

the Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to participate in this hearing and to 

discuss VA’s pain management programs and the use of medications, particularly 

opioids, to treat Veterans experiencing acute and chronic pain. I am accompanied 

today by Dr. Gavin West, Clinical Operations, Veterans Health Administration 

(VHA) and Dr. Michael Valentino, Chief Consultant, Pharmacy Benefits Management, VHA. 

I would like to begin by saying that clearly we are deeply concerned about the 

allegations of improper opioid prescribing practices and retaliatory behavior at the 

Tomah VA Medical Center (VAMC). To deliver high-quality health care, we rely on 

the integrity, observations, and recommendations of VA’s front-line staff, who work 

professionally and compassionately with Veterans each and every day. We recognize 

the toll this situation is taking on all involved, and we are quickly and thoroughly 

investigating these issues. 

CHRONIC PAIN ACROSS THE NATION

Chronic pain affects the Veteran population, but this is not an issue limited to 

Veterans. Chronic pain is a national public health problem as outlined in the 2011 

study by the Institute of Medicine (IOM). At least 100 million Americans suffer from 

some form of chronic pain. The IOM study describes in detail many concerns of pain 

management, including system-wide deficits in the training of our Nation’s health 

care professionals in pain management; the problems caused by a fragmented health 

care system; the general public’s lack of knowledge about pain leading to inadequate 

7 

1 Edlund MJ et al, Patterns of opioid use for chronic noncancer pain in the Veterans Health 

Administration from 2009 to 201. PAIN 155(2014) 2337–2343 

self-management; and the need for care planning that is personalized for the individual patient. While about 30 percent of the Nation’s adult population experiences 

chronic pain, the problem of chronic pain in VA is even more daunting, with almost 

60 percent of returning Veterans from the Middle East and more than 50 percent 

of older Veterans in the VA health care system living with some form of chronic 

pain. The treatment of Veterans’ pain is often very complex. Many of our Veterans 

have survived severe battlefield injuries, some repeated, resulting in life-long moderate to severe pain related to damage to their musculoskeletal system and permanent nerve damage, which cannot only impact their physical abilities but also impact their emotional health and brain structures. 

CURRENT VHA PAIN MANAGEMENT COLLABORATION

To implement effective management of pain, VHA’s National Pain Program office 

oversees several work groups and a National Pain Management Strategy Coordinating Committee representing the VHA offices of nursing, pharmacy, mental 

health, primary care, anesthesia, education, integrative health, and physical medicine and rehabilitation. Working with the field, these groups develop, review and 

communicate strong pain management practices to VHA clinicians and clinical 

teams. For example, the VHA Pain Leadership Group, consisting of Pain Points of 

Contact for the Veterans Integrated Service Networks (VISNs) and facilities, meets 

monthly with the National Pain Program office to discuss policy, programs and clinical issues and disseminate information to the field as well as to provide feedback 

to VACO leadership about these programs. Several of these groups are chartered to 

promote the transformation of pain care in VHA at all level of the Stepped Care 

Model: the Pain Patient Aligned Care Team (PACT) Initiative Tactical Advisory 

Group focuses on primary care issues; the Pain Medicine Specialty Team Workgroup 

builds capacity for specialty pain services; the Interdisciplinary Pain Management 

Workgroup focuses on developing CARF certified tertiary care pain management 

programs for complex patients. Opioid Safety Initiative (OSI) Toolkit Task Force has 

published and promoted 16 evidenced-based documents and presentations to support 

the Academic Detailing model of the OSI. More information on the OSI Toolkit can 

be found via the follow link: (http://vaww.va.gov/PAINMANAGEMENT/index.asp). 

The Department of Defense (DOD)-VA Health Executive Council’s Pain Management Workgroup (PMWG) oversees joint projects with the DOD, including the two 

Joint Investment Fund (JIF) projects, the Joint Pain Education and Training Project 

and the Tiered Acupuncture Training Across Clinical Settings, and other projects 

that aim to standardize good pain care across DOD and VHA. 

Academic Detailing is a proven method in changing clinicians’ behavior when addressing a difficult medical problem in a population. Academic Detailing combines 

longitudinal monitoring of clinical practices, regular feedback to providers on performance, and education and training in safer and more effective pain management. 

Our pain management programs, including the Specialty Care Access Network-Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes (SCAN-ECHO) and the OSI, have 

been designed to integrate into the Academic Detailing model. 

VA’S PROGRESS IN PAIN MANAGEMENT

Chronic pain management is challenging for Veterans and clinicians—VA continues to focus on identifying Veteran-centric approaches that can be tailored to individual needs that may also include physician therapy, acupuncture, chiropractic 

treatments, and other modalities in addition to medications. Opioids are an effective 

treatment, but their use requires constant vigilance to minimize risks and adverse 

effects. VA launched a system-wide OSI in October 2013, and has seen significant 

improvement in the use of opioids as discussed later in the testimony. Most recently, 

in March 2015, we launched the new Opioid Therapy Risk Report tool which provides detailed information on the risk status of Veterans taking opioids to assist VA 

primary care clinicians with pain management treatment plans. This tool is a core 

component of our reinvigorated focus on patient safety and effectiveness. 

VA’s own data, as well as the peer-reviewed medical literature, suggest that VA 

is making progress relative to the rest of the Nation. In December 2014, an independent study by RTI International health services researcher, Mark Edlund, MD, 

Ph.D. and colleagues, supported by a grant from the National Institute of Drug 

Abuse, was published in the journal PAIN1 the premier research publication in the 

field of pain management. This study, using VHA pharmacy and administrative 

data, reviewed the duration of opioid therapy, the median daily dose of opioids, and 

8 

the use of opioids in Veterans with substance use disorders and co-morbid chronic 

non-cancer pain. Dr. Edlund and his colleagues found that: • First, half of all Veterans receiving opioids for chronic non-cancer pain, are receiving them short-term (i.e.: for less than 90 days per year); • Second, the daily opioid dose in VA is generally modest, with a median of 20 

Morphine Equivalent Daily Dose (MEDD), which is considered low risk; and • Third, the use of high-volume opioids (in terms of total annual dose) is not increased in VA patients with substance use disorders as has been found to be the 

case in non-VA patients. 

Dr. Edlund and the other authors concluded ‘‘this suggests appropriate vigilance 

at VA, which may be facilitated by a transparent and universal electronic medical 

record.’’ Although it is good to have this information, a confirmation of our efforts 

for several years, starting with the ‘‘high alert’’ opioid initiative in 2008 and multiple educational offerings, by no means is VA’s work finished. In fact, although we 

are well along in implementing our plan, VA is also working with other Federal 

agencies and VAMC experts to implement the National Institutes of Health-Department of Health and Human Services National Pain Strategy, an outgrowth of the 

IOM study, which recommends a transformation in the education of physicians and 

other health care professionals in pain management. By virtue of VA’s central national role in medical student education and residency training of primary care physicians and providers, we will be playing a major role in this national effort. But 

we have already started with our robust education and training programs for primary care, such as SCAN-ECHO, Mini-residency, Community of Practice calls, two 

JIF training programs with DOD, and dissemination of the OSI Toolkit. 

The Opioid Safety Initiative 

The OSI was chartered by the Under Secretary for Health in August 2012. The 

OSI was piloted in several VISNs. Based on those results of the pilot programs, OSI 

was implemented nationwide in August 2013. The OSI objective is to make the totality of opioid use visible at all levels in the organization. It includes key clinical 

indicators such as the number of unique pharmacy patients dispensed an opioid, 

unique patients on long-term opioids who receive a urine drug screen, the number 

of patients receiving an opioid and a benzodiazepine (which puts them at a higher 

risk of adverse events), and the average MEDD of opioids. Results of key clinical 

metrics for VHA measured by the OSI from Quarter 4, Fiscal Year 2012 (beginning 

in July 2012) to Quarter 1, Fiscal Year 2015 (ending in December 2014) are: 

• 91,614 (13%) fewer patients receiving opioids (679,376 => 587,762); • 29,281 (24%) fewer patients receiving opioids and benzodiazepines together 

(122,633 => 93,352); • 71,255 more patients on opioids that have had a urine drug screen to help guide 

treatment decisions(160,601 => 231,856); • 67,466 (15%) fewer patients on long-term opioid therapy (438,329 => 370,863); • The overall dosage of opioids is decreasing in the VA system as 10,143 (17%) 

fewer patients are receiving greater than or equal to 100 MEDD (59,499 => 49,356); 

and • The desired results of OSI have been achieved during a time that VA has seen 

an overall growth of 75,843 (2%) patients who have utilized VA outpatient pharmacy services (3,959,852 => 4,035,695). 

The changes in prescribing and consumption are occurring at a modest pace and 

the OSI dashboard metrics indicate the overall trends are moving in the desired direction. OSI will be implemented in a cautious and measured way to give VA time 

to build the infrastructure and processes necessary to allow VA clinicians to incorporate new pain management strategies into their treatment approaches. A measured process will also give VA patients time to adjust to new treatment options and 

to mitigate any patient dissatisfaction that may accompany these changes. 

While these changes may appear to be modest given the size of the VA patient 

population, they signal an important trend in VA’s use of opioids. VA expects this 

trend to continue as it renews its efforts to promote safe and effective pharmacologic 

and non-pharmacologic pain management therapies. Very effective programs yielding significant results have been identified (e.g., Minneapolis, Tampa), and are being 

studied as strong practice leaders. 

State Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs 

Another risk management approach to support the Veterans’ and public’s safety 

is VHA participation in state Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs (PDMP). 

These programs, with appropriate health privacy protections, allow for the interaction between VA and state databases, so that providers can identify potentially 

vulnerable at-risk individuals. VA providers can now access the state PDMP for inVerDate Mar 15 2010 12:35 Jun 14, 2016 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 Z:\ACTIVE\032615.TXT PAULIN
9 

formation on prescribing and dispensing of controlled substances to Veterans outside 

the VA health care system. When fully deployed, non-VA providers will also be able 

to identify their patients who may be receiving controlled substances from VA. Participation in PDMPs will enable providers to identify patients who have received 

non-VA prescriptions for controlled substances, which in turn offers greater opportunity to discuss the effectiveness of these non-VA prescriptions in treating their 

pain or symptoms. More importantly, information available through these programs 

will help both VA and non-VA providers to prevent harm to patients that could 

occur if the provider was unaware that a controlled substance medication had been 

prescribed elsewhere already. 

Opioid Therapy Risk Report 

In conjunction with the OSI, a population-based provider report and feedback tool 

has recently been developed and is now available to all primary care providers and 

their teams. This report, easily accessible through a direct link in the electronic 

health record, assists the PACTs to manage their entire panel of patients prescribed 

pharmacotherapy for acute or chronic pain; this tool makes it easy to ensure Veterans receiving safe, quality care. This resource provides a quick but thorough assessment of their patients’ opioid risk for adverse outcomes. Included in the report 

is the current opioid dose, concomitant use of benzodiazepines, and presence of associated high-risk diagnoses such as substance use disorder or Post Traumatic Stress 

Disorder. Urine drug screens, recent mental health and primary care visits, and the 

presence of a signed opioid agreement are also tracked. By clicking on the patient’s 

name in the report, the provider can immediately pull up graphs showing the relationship between the patient’s opioid dose and pain score over the past 12 months. 

This tabular and graphical information alerts the provider to situations where closer 

follow up may be needed or to settings where opioid withdrawal or dose reduction 

may be opportune. To better inform decisionmaking, links to practical pain presentations and opioid clinical guidelines are also embedded. 

This report was developed in late 2014 and released in early 2015. A comprehensive training program for primary care was launched in February 2015 reaching 

over 2,000 PACT providers and their teams. This tool will also assist in the monitoring of opioid prescribing behavior of our primary care workforce over time. 

Complementary and Integrative Medicine 

The number one strategic goal of VHA is ‘‘to provide Veterans personalized, 

proactive, patient-driven health care.’’ Integrative Health includes Complementary 

and Alternative Medicine approaches, provides a framework that aligns with personalized, proactive, patient-driven care. There is growing evidence in the effectiveness of non-pharmacological approaches as part of a comprehensive care plan for 

chronic pain which includes acupuncture, massage, yoga and spinal manipulation. 

VA is establishing the Integrative Health Coordinating Center (IHCC) within the 

Office of Patient-Centered Care and Cultural Transformation to build the infrastructure (e.g. establishing new occupations) to support the delivery of these services. 

CLEVELAND VA MEDICAL CENTER’S SUCCESS IN PAIN MANAGEMENT

Providing Veterans excellent care in pain management is taking center stage at 

the Louis Stokes VAMC in Cleveland, Ohio. The Cleveland VAMC earned the Clinical Center of Excellence Award from the American Pain Society for implementing 

a model of care where Veterans engage in using interventional procedures and complementary and alternative medicine to lower their reliance on opioids. This model 

of care required cultural change within the pain management staff; they worked together to embrace clinical and behavioral services in a multi-disciplinary fashion to 

promote physical rehabilitation and self-management of pain. 

It has taken time, but today, the Cleveland VAMC has dedicated support in education for both staff and patients, funding to support their programs, dedicated 

staffing, improved resilience among their Veteran population, and a demonstrated 

reduction in the use of opioids among their patients. 

The unique program follows a three-level stepped-care model, based on Veteran 

need: 

• Level-I Veterans are managed by primary care providers with pain management training. The specialized training is provided through advanced video teleconferencing, in which the SCAN-ECHO team leads weekly training sessions. Time 

is protected for the providers to attend weekly 90-minute sessions for at least a 

year. 

• Level-II Veterans are referred to outpatient clinics where they can be seen by 

specialists in pain medicine, pain psychology, and other allied health professionals 

to assist them in managing their pain. 

10 

• Level-III is the Intensive Outpatient Program (IOP) where more complex cases 

are referred. In the IOP, Veterans are enrolled in a 12-week, 1-day/week rehabilitation program that features psychological interventions, aquatic therapy, group exercise, occupational therapy, and dietary and vocational rehabilitation. 

HYDROCODONE RESCHEDULING AND THE IMPACT ON VETERANS

The new Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) rescheduling for hydrocodone 

products became effective on October 6, 2014, and aim to improve medication safety 

and reduce misuse and abuse of opioid analgesics. Prior to the DEA rule change, 

a provider could authorize five refills within a 6-month period on hydrocodone combination products. These refills did not require Veterans to have monthly contact 

with their providers as the refills were requested by the Veteran through the VA 

Pharmacy. Now that the rule change has gone into effect, limitations in the VA electronic health record means Veterans must contact their providers, either in person 

or by telephone, to have a new prescription written when their supply is running 

low before the VA Pharmacy can dispense the hydrocodone combination prescriptions. Although refills for hydrocodone-containing products are not permitted, under 

the DEA rule change, Veterans do not necessarily always need to physically see 

their provider at a clinic visit. VHA policy requires patients on chronic opioid therapy to be evaluated once every 1 to 6 months, based on provider assessments. Each 

Veteran’s case is different and providers may issue a new prescription for Veterans 

based on telephone contact, if that is clinically appropriate. 

VA’S OPIOID EDUCATION AND NALOXONE DISTRIBUTION PROGRAM

In certain situations, opioids are the best choice for pain. Naloxone is an antidote 

to respiratory depression which can cause fatal overdose. With opioid use, risks are 

involved, and VA is taking precautionary steps to mitigate these risks. In May 2014, 

a VHA team developed and implemented VA’s Overdose Education and Naloxone 

Distribution (OEND) program. Although VA’s national OEND program is less than 

1 year old, as of March 8, 2015, over 2,400 naloxone kit prescriptions have been dispensed to at-risk Veterans throughout the United States. As a result of these efforts, 33 individuals’ life-treatening opioid overdoses were reversed as a direct result 

of the OEND program. 

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, we are continuing to investigate the situation at the Tomah VAMC 

and will keep you up-to-date on our findings. If employee misconduct is identified, 

VA will take the appropriate action and hold those responsible accountable. These 

investigations are an opportunity to get to the bottom of any issues so that moving 

forward, these actions are not repeated elsewhere. 

While we know our work to improve pain management programs and the use of 

medications will never truly be finished, VA has been at the forefront in dealing 

with pain management, and we will continue to do so to better serve the needs of 

Veterans. 

Mr. Chairman, we appreciate this Committee’s support and encouragement in 

identifying and resolving challenges as we find new ways to care for Veterans. 

Chairman ISAKSON. Thank you, Dr. Clancy. 

Dr. Daigh. 

STATEMENT OF JOHN D. DAIGH, JR., M.D., C.P.A., ASSISTANT 

INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR HEALTHCARE INSPECTIONS, OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS 

Dr. DAIGH. Thank you. Good morning, Chairman Isakson, Ranking Member Blumenthal, and Members of the Committee. Thank 

you for the opportunity to appear before you today on this important topic of opioid prescription policies of the Department of Veterans Affairs and efforts in combating over-medication. My written 

statement references several OIG reports and a national review on 

the dispensing of take-home opioids that contain national data 

from fiscal year 2012. 

11 

In 2010, VA and DOD published an excellent clinical practice 

guideline, The Management of Opioid Therapy for Chronic Pain. 

Our national review demonstrates that in 2012, VA providers were, 

in general, non-compliant with guideline requirements. 

Whether it be the use of urine drug screens and follow-up visits 

where they were 37 percent compliant with the guideline, whether 

it be the practice of refilling prescriptions at least 7 days early 23 

percent non-compliance with the guideline, the concomitant use of 

benzodiazepines and narcotic medications which occurred in the 

chronic use population 92 percent of the time. Or ensuring that 

veterans with substance use disorder and chronic pain receive concurrent treatment for their substance use disorder and urinary 

drug testing, there was 10.5 percent compliance. 

The data and the report make clear that the VA as a system of 

care in fiscal year 2012 that was managing this patient population 

very poorly. Who were these patients? One in 16 served in Operation Enduring Freedom or Operation Iraqi Freedom. One in three 

was diagnosed with a mood disorder, one in five with PTSD, one 

in seven with substance use disorder. 

Since the publication of this report, I believe the VA has made 

serious efforts and dramatic improvement in the way they deliver 

pain care. 

On another topic, some have claimed that the Office of Healthcare Inspections has hidden secret, unpublished reports. I dispute 

this claim. I have always had a policy, upon accepting a hotline, 

of either publishing the report to the Web in an unredacted format 

or administratively closing the report. 

The semiannual has a list, including the number of admin closures each 6 months, it is common practice to brief Members of 

Congress on the results of accepted hotlines, whether they are 

admin-closed or published. Going forward, all hotlines will be published to the Web and admin closures going back to 2006 are in the 

process of being published to the Web. I hope to revisit this policy 

going forward with both the House and Senate Committees. 

The admin closure of the Tomah hotline is drawing particular attention. On August 31, 2011, my office opened a hotline at Tomah 

that was based upon the receipt of a request from Congressman 

Kind, data from an employee survey that we did as part of our routine cap, and allegations that were received from out hotline. 

In summary, it was alleged that narcotic medication was being 

used as the primary treatment for PTSD, that specific patients 

were receiving poor quality of medical care, that numerous patients 

were dying of narcotic overdose, that Tomah providers were 

contemplating the amputation of a veteran’s leg as treatment for 

his pain syndrome, and that there was inappropriate interference 

with the administration of the pharmacy service by Tomah 

management. 

In the administrative closure on this matter, the first four pages, 

detail the steps that OIG staff took to determine if these allegations had factual support. We reviewed numerous medical charts 

and peer reviews. We interviewed many current and former employees. We contacted the local Tomah police, the Milwaukee police, the Drug Enforcement Agency. We pulled the email from 17 

employees. 

12 

1 VHA Directive 2009–053, Pain Management, October 28, 2009. 2 Clinical Practice Guideline—Management of Opioid Therapy for Chronic Pain, May 2010, 

http://www.healthquality.va.gov/guidelines/Pain/cot/COT_312_Full-er.pdf. 

The Office of Investigations, which is another element of the IG, 

investigated aspects of these allegations. We found that the allegations that led us to Tomah could not be substantiated. We did find 

examples of failure to comply with the DOD/VA chronic pain guidelines, consistent with the national data that I just discussed with 

you today from fiscal year 2012. 

Given that the data we collected did not support the allegations 

that led us to Tomah, and knowing that our national report would 

highlight the many deficiencies in VA providers’ compliance with 

these guidelines, and that other projects in my office had great demand for OIG psychiatry time, I chose to administratively close 

this report. 

To ensure that the deficiencies we identified were corrected by 

Veterans Health Administration (VHA), my staff met with the Director of the Tomah VAMC and with the Veterans Integrated Service Network (VISN) Director for Tomah. Both gentlemen were familiar with the individuals and issues we described at Tomah. 

These leaders discussed the changes that had been instituted and 

future planned actions to address the deficiencies we identified. 

I did not brief Congressman Kind on the admin closure. That 

was a deviation from our practice and I apologized to him for this 

failure. I will be pleased to answer your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Daigh follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JOHN D. DAIGH, JR., M.D., CPA, ASSISTANT INSPECTOR

GENERAL FOR HEALTHCARE INSPECTIONS, OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL, U.S. 

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, Thank you for the opportunity to 

discuss the Office of Inspector General’s (OIG) work concerning VA’s opioid prescription policies and practices. My statement will focus on a national review issued on 

May 14, 2014, Healthcare Inspection—VA Patterns of Dispensing Take-Home Opioids 

and Monitoring Patients on Opioid Therapy, as well as other reviews that we have 

conducted since 2011. A listing of those reports is included in Appendix A. 

BACKGROUND

Adequate management of pain has become a tenant of the compassionate delivery 

of health care. Subjective pain levels are now considered to be the fifth vital sign 

in medicine in addition to body temperature, pulse rate, respiration rate, and blood 

pressure. It has been estimated that pain affects 100 million adults in the United 

States. More than 50 percent of veterans enrolled and receiving VA care are affected 

by chronic pain. Servicemembers come to VA with a combination of health care conditions: pain resulting from injuries during military service, mental health disorders 

including Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), and substance use disorders that 

involve alcohol and/or narcotic medications. 

In 1998, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) initiated a National Pain 

Management Strategy to establish pain management as a national priority. In 2009, 

VHA issued a directive for the improvement of pain management consistent with 

VHA’s National Pain Management Strategy.1

In 2003, VA and the Department of Defense (DOD) published the first Clinical 

Practice Guideline for Management of Opioid Therapy for Chronic Pain (Clinical 

Practice Guideline) to improve management, quality of life, and quality of care for 

veterans and servicemembers. It was last updated in 2010.2

Opioid therapy is intended for patients who suffer from moderate to severe chronic pain and who have been previously assessed and treated with non-opioid or nonpharmacological therapy with no response or limited success or response, and who 

may benefit from opioid therapy for pain control. Opioids are powerful medications 

that can help manage pain when prescribed for the right condition and when used 

13 

properly. However, if prescribed inappropriately or if used improperly, they can 

cause serious harm, including overdose and death. Patient adherence with the proper use of opioids is crucial in the delivery of appropriate opioid therapy. Patient assessments, follow-up evaluations, and urine drug tests (UDTs) are recommended 

monitoring tools for safe and effective use of opioids. 

VA PATTERNS OF DISPENSING TAKE-HOME OPIOIDS AND MONITORING PATIENTS

ON OPIOID THERAPY

As requested by the U.S. Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, the OIG conducted a study to assess the provision of VA outpatient (take-home) opioids and 

monitoring of patients on opioid therapy (hereinafter referred to as opioid patients). 

The objectives of the study were to: 

• Describe both the prevalence of VA patients who filled any take-home opioid 

prescriptions at VA in fiscal year (FY) 2012 and their baseline characteristics. 

• Evaluate VA dispensing patterns of take-home opioids, including concurrent 

(filled) benzodiazepines, filled acetaminophen, and early refills of opioids. 

• Assess the extent to which VA screens and monitors opioid patients in alignment with measures adapted from selected recommendations in the Clinical Practice 

Guideline. 

• Define VA patterns of providing psychosocial treatment for pain, pain clinic 

service, and medication management/pharmacy reconciliation for take-home opioid 

patients. 

• Determine the prevalence of six selected serious clinical adverse effects among 

VA take-home opioid patients that may reasonably be expected to relate to opioid 

therapy. 

In our May 14, 2014, report, we made six recommendations, and the Under Secretary of Health agreed to the findings and recommendations and provided an improvement plan. As of March 20, 2015, four recommendations are closed: 

• We recommended that the Under Secretary for Health ensure that the practice 

of prescribing acetaminophen is in compliance with acceptable standards. 

• We recommended that the Under Secretary for Health ensure that follow-up 

evaluations of patients on take-home opioids are performed timely. 

• We recommended that the Under Secretary for Health ensure that opioid patients with active (not in remission) substance use receive treatment for substance 

use concurrently with urine drug tests. 

• We recommended that the Under Secretary for Health ensure that VA’s practice 

of prescribing and dispensing benzodiazepines concurrently with opioids is in alignment with acceptable standards. 

As of March 20, 2015, only two recommendations remain open: 

• Recommendation 2: We recommended that the Under Secretary for Health ensure that VA’s practice of routine and random urine drug tests prior to initiating 

and during take-home opioid therapy to confirm the appropriate use of opioids is 

in alignment with acceptable standards. 

VA management provided an estimated implementation date of February 28, 

2015. In its most recent status update dated December 30, 2014, VA indicated that 

actions to implement this recommendation remain in progress. VA is scheduled to 

provide another status update to the OIG by March 31, 2015. 

• Recommendation 6: We recommended that the Under Secretary for Health ensure that medication reconciliation is performed to prevent adverse drug interactions. 

VA management provided an estimated implementation date of December 31, 

2014. However, VA indicated in its most recent status update dated December 30, 

2014, that actions to implement the recommendation remain in progress. VA did not 

provide an updated implementation date estimate. VA is scheduled to provide another status update to the OIG by March 31, 2015. 

Findings 

We integrated and analyzed VA administrative files, as well as the Death Master 

Files of the Social Security Administration, for the population of nearly half a million VA patients who filled at least one oral or transdermal opioid prescription from 

VA for self-administration at home in FY 2012. We followed retrospectively the 

442,544 patients in the population who did not receive any hospice or palliative care 

during the fiscal year or within 1 year prior to their first take-home opioid prescription for their experience with the provision of VA opioid therapy. 

14 

Population 

We found that 7.7 percent of VA patients were on take-home opioids. A majority 

(92.5 percent) of the opioid patients were male, which mirrored the gender composition of VA patients. The average and the median patient age at their first opioid 

prescription in FY 2012 was 59.4 and 61, respectively. Approximately 1 in every 16 

patients had served in Operation Enduring Freedom/Operation Iraqi Freedom. Approximately 87 percent of the opioid patients were diagnosed with a primary pain 

site of non-cancer origin that could result in pain serious enough to warrant an 

opioid medication. Six out of 10 patients had been diagnosed with mental health 

issues, 1 in 3 with mood disorders, 1 of 5 with PTSD, and 1 of 7 with substance 

use. Nearly 94 percent of the study population had been diagnosed with either pain 

or mental health issues and 58.4 percent with both. About one third of the opioid 

patients were on take-home opioids for more than 90 days (chronic users) in FY 

2012. Approximately half of the study population were new patients in the sense 

that they were initiated on take-home opioid therapy during FY 2012 after not having been on take-home opioids for at least more than 1 year. Seven out of 10 of the 

non-chronic users were new patients in contrast to 1 in 5 of the chronic users. Nearly 41 percent of the study population had been dispensed with one prescription. This 

41 percent was composed entirely of the 61.4 percent of non-chronic users because 

none of the opioids were allowed to be prescribed for more than 90 days in one prescription. Patients with six or more prescriptions were mainly chronic users, which 

amounted to 69.3 percent of that group. 

Dispensing Patterns and Drug Interactions 

Almost all (98.4 percent) patients received their prescriptions from a single 

VAMC, and three quarters of the patient population had all their (filled) prescriptions issued from a single prescriber. Most (95.0 percent) of the patients were dispensed with a single type of opioid. More than 6 percent of patients received at least 

one long-acting opioid product, with the percentage of chronic users being four times 

that of non-chronic users. Opioid dosages with a morphine equivalent of at least 200 

milligrams (mg)/day were dispensed to 1.2 percent of the study population. We 

found that refills of opioids at least 7 days early occurred in 23 percent of the population, with refills of at least 11 days early in 14 percent of the population. 

The concurrent use of benzodiazepines and opioids can be dangerous because 

opioids and benzodiazepines can depress the central nervous system and thereby affect heart rhythm, slow respiration, and even lead to death. We found that takehome benzodiazepines were dispensed to 7.4 percent of the study population, with 

the percentage of chronic opioid users being 1.6 times that of non-chronic users. We 

determined that 71 percent of the opioid patients who also received take-home benzodiazepines were dispensed benzodiazepines concurrently with opioids. The percentage of chronic opioid users with concurrent benzodiazepines was 92.6, and the 

percentage of non-chronic users was 53.6. 

Acetaminophen poisoning is a leading cause of liver toxicity. We determined that 

take-home acetaminophens were given to 92.3 percent of the study patients and that 

2.0 percent of them were given an average daily dose of 4 g/day or more. The Clinical Practice Guideline calls for a urine drug test (UDT) prior to initiating opioid 

therapy and a follow-up contact at least every 2–4 weeks after any change in medication regimen. We determined that 6.4 percent of the new patients who were initiated take-home opioids in FY 2012 after not having been on take-home opioids for 

at least more than 1 year received both a UDT prior to and a follow-up UDT within 

30 days. 

Screening and Monitoring 

The Clinical Practice Guideline requires routine and random UDTs to confirm the 

appropriate use of opioids by patients and a follow-up contact either in-person or 

a telephone encounter at least once every 1–6 months for the duration of opioid 

therapy. We determined that 37 percent of the existing opioid patients who were 

on take-home opioids at least from FY 2011 received both an annual UDT and a 

follow-up contact within 6 months of each filled opioid prescription. We found that 

VA conducted an annual UDT for 37.9 percent of the existing opioid patients which 

accounted for 40.9 percent of the chronic opioid users and 33.7 percent of the nonchronic users. We observed wide variation of VA medical centers’ practice on an annual UDT, ranging from 4.4 percent to 87.6 percent. 

We found that 13.1 percent of the study population was diagnosed with active 

substance use. The Clinical Practice Guideline specifies that chronic (for more than 

1 month) opioid therapy is absolutely contraindicated in patients with active (not 

in remission) substance use disorders (SUD) who are not in treatment. It recommends that active substance use patients receive SUD treatment concurrently 

15 

with urine drug testing as an adjunctive tool at regular intervals. For the active 

substance use patients who had at least 90 days available for follow-up in FY 2012, 

we determined that 10.5 percent received both a treatment for substance use and 

a UDT within 90 days of each filled opioid prescription. 

Pain Management Requires Multiple Specialties 

Psychotherapy, including cognitive behavioral therapy, is recommended to reduce 

pain and improve function in chronic pain patients. We found that 45.2 percent of 

the opioid patients received at least one psychosocial treatment for pain and that 

35.1 percent of these patients received this treatment after their first filled opioid 

prescription in FY 2012. We determined that 8.7 percent of the opioid patients received care from a Pain Clinic. A review of medications by a pharmacist or other 

health care professional can prevent harmful interactions between these medications. We found that 38.8 percent of the opioid patients received medication management or pharmacy reconciliation during the fiscal year. 

Opioid Side Effects 

We determined percentages of opioid patients with evidence of a serious adverse 

effect that may reasonably be expected to be related to opioid therapy for the following six serious adverse effects: (1) opioid overdose, (2) sedative overdose, (3) drug 

delirium, (4) drug detoxification, (5) acetaminophen overdose, and (6) possible and 

confirmed suicide attempts. We found that less than 1 percent of the population experienced any one of these adverse effects during the fiscal year, except for the adverse effect of possible and confirmed suicide attempts that was evident in 2 percent 

of the opioid patients. 

OTHER OIG REPORTS

The OIG has published a number of reports that address aspects of the issues 

when patients are prescribed large doses of opioids. These reports have certain 

themes: 

• The use of high dose opioids in patients with a substance use disorder and mental illness is a common clinical situation. • Compliance with clinical guidelines is not routine. • Primary care providers bear the responsibility for managing these complex patients, often with limited support from pain management experts and related specialists. 

• The use of high dose opioids causes friction within provider groups, where opinions on the proper use of these medications varies. 

• Non-traditional therapies that may offer the benefit of less narcotic use are not 

fully utilized. 

I would like to discuss four reports that highlight these themes. 

In our report, Healthcare Inspection—Medication Management Issues in a High 

Risk Patient, Tuscaloosa VA Medical Center, Tuscaloosa, Alabama, we substantiated 

that facility providers collectively prescribed oxycodone, methadone, and benzodiazepines to a high-risk patient who died of an accidental multi-drug overdose. Three 

factors contributed to this outcome: 

• Providers did not consistently comply with VHA and local policies for the management of chronic pain in this high-risk patient. Additionally, the patient’s primary 

care provider did not conduct key portions of the pain assessment program. These 

include the requirement to address previous pain treatments and their effectiveness, 

suicide risk status, and drug overdose history. The primary care provider did not 

initiate an opioid pain care agreement with the patient or ensure adequate patient 

monitoring and follow-up after prescribing methadone. Required patient education 

regarding the specific dangers of methadone was not documented. 

• The facility did not ensure access to an interdisciplinary pain management 

team or a pain clinic to provide needed expert services to this patient. 

• Providers did not ensure communication and coordination of care. The primary 

care provider did not read other providers’ progress notes reflecting concerns about 

prescribing opioids and benzodiazepines, the primary care and mental health providers did not communicate directly about this high-risk patient, and the suicide 

prevention staff did not assist in coordinating this patient’s care although the patient was on the High Risk for Suicide list. 

We made seven recommendations and as of March 20, 2015, only Recommendation 7 that the Facility Director ensure access to interdisciplinary plan management 

care for chronic pain patients who do not respond to standard medical treatment 

remains open. We will continue to follow-up until VHA provides documentation that 

planned corrective actions have been implemented. 

16 

In our report, Healthcare Inspection—Alleged Improper Opioid Prescription Renewal Practices, San Francisco VA Medical Center, San Francisco, California, we 

addressed several issues related to the group practice of primary care, where opinions vary on the use of high dose narcotic medications. The OIG substantiated the 

allegation that physicians are tasked with evaluating numerous opioid renewal requests for patients with whom they are unfamiliar. VHA policy requires that certain 

opioid prescriptions are restricted to a 30-day supply with no refills, which means 

patients must obtain a new or renewal prescription every month. During the course 

of our inspection, we found that all clinic physicians were part-time; therefore, patients requiring opioid prescription renewals every 30 days could be subjected to extended periods without their opioid medication, if required to see one provider. Senior leaders reported that in an effort to avoid such situations, a prescription renewal 

process was implemented for those instances when a patient requires a medication 

renewal but is unable to schedule a timely encounter with his or her primary care 

provider. The renewal process, established in 2006, assigned the attending on duty 

the responsibility for evaluating all medication renewal requests, including opioids 

for a period of time. The facility also hired clinical pharmacists who were designated 

to screen all renewal requests prior to provider evaluation for refills. The physicians 

we interviewed validated the complainant’s allegation that within their on-duty 

half-day clinics they evaluated multiple opioid renewal requests for patients unknown to them. VHA policy, however, does not prohibit a provider from renewing 

an opioid prescription for a patient he or she has not evaluated in person. 

We partially substantiated that providers do not routinely document patients’ 

opioid prescription renewal problems in the electronic health record. The providers 

did not consistently document an assessment for adherence with appropriate use of 

opioids and monitor patients for misuse. The primary care providers did not consistently complete the ‘‘narcotic instructions note’’ in the health record template 

We substantiated that there have been patient hospitalizations related to opioid 

misuse. Seven clinic patients were hospitalized for opioid overdose; however, the primary care provider, Psychiatry Service, and/or the facility’s Substance Abuse Program appropriately assessed and monitored the patients. There were no deaths related to opioid overdose. 

The report made two recommendations with which the Veteran Integrated Service 

Network (VISN) and facility directors concurred. We closed our report on April 17, 

2014, after receiving documentation from VA that corrective actions were sufficiently implemented. 

In an August 21, 2012, report, Healthcare Inspection—Management of Chronic 

Opioid Therapy at a VA Maine Healthcare System Community Based Outpatient 

Clinic, we substantiated the allegation that providers did not adequately assess patients who were prescribed opioids for chronic pain. Although providers performed 

initial pain assessments of patients, reassessments were not consistently documented at the minimum required frequency. 

We also substantiated the allegation that providers did not adequately monitor 

patients who were prescribed opioids for misuse or diversion of the medications. One 

provider did not properly follow-up on a patient’s positive urine drug test, and due 

to staffing constraints at the clinic, patients often obtained prescriptions from multiple providers. 

We substantiated the allegation that facility managers asked providers to write 

opioid prescriptions for patients whom the providers had not assessed. 

We made one recommendation with which the VISN and facility directors concurred. Based on documentation from VA that corrective actions were sufficiently 

implemented, we closed our report on February 22, 2013. 

In a June 15, 2011, report, Healthcare Inspection—Prescribing Practices in the 

Pain Management Clinic at John D. Dingell VA Medical Center, Detroit, Michigan, 

we substantiated that providers prescribed controlled substances without adequate 

evaluation of patients and the facility did not have a policy outlining requirements 

for the ongoing assessment of patients treated with opioid medications. The Clinical 

Practice Guideline recommends that patients be evaluated every 1–6 months. We 

reviewed 20 patients’ electronic medical records, including those named by the complainant and those with the largest aggregate opioid doses identified from among 

the 4,445 patients who received these medications during December 2010. We found 

that during 2010, five patients on chronic opioid therapy had no evaluation and six 

patients had evaluations more than 7 months apart. For 10 of these patients, prescriptions were written by one physician. 

We did not substantiate the allegation that clinic supervisors coerced providers to 

prescribe controlled substances to patients not under their care. A provider had numerous patients who would require medication renewals. Physician coverage for 

17 

these patients was arranged, after some discussion regarding the proper provision 

of care, to this population of controlled substance Users. 

We made two recommendations with which the VISN and facility directors concurred. Based on documentation from VA that corrective actions were sufficiently 

implemented, we closed our report on November 25, 2011. 

CONCLUSION

The use of high dose opioids for the primary treatment of pain conditions is all 

too common within the veteran population. Patients with mental health or substance use disorders comprise a particularly complex subgroup of patients whose 

chronic mental health disorders may exceed the competence expected of primary 

care providers. As the findings in our national report demonstrate, VA was not following its own policies and procedures in six key areas: acetaminophen prescription 

practices; follow-up evaluations of patients on take-home opioids; concurrent substance use treatment with urine drug tests; prescribing and dispensing of benzodiazepines concurrently with opioids; routine and random urine drug tests prior to and 

during take-home opioid therapy; and medication reconciliation. We note that VA 

has taken actions to implement a number of the recommendations in this report, 

but VA must be vigilant in monitoring facility compliance with opioid prescription 

policies and in completing outstanding recommendations. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement. I would be pleased to answer any 

questions you or other Members of the Committee may have. 

APPENDIX A 

VA OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

REPORTING ON OPIOID PRESCRIPTION PRACTICES

December 9, 2014 Alleged Inappropriate Opioid Prescribing Practices, Chillicothe VA Medical Center, Chillicothe, Ohio 

http://www.va.gov/oig/pubs/VAOIG-14-00351-53.pdf 

July 17, 2014 Quality of Care and Staff Safety Concerns at the Huntsville 

Community Based Outpatient Clinic, Huntsville, Alabama 

http://www.va.gov/oig/pubs/VAOIG-14-01322-215.pdf 

June 25, 2014 Medication Management Issues in a High Risk Patient, Tuscaloosa VA Medical Center, Tuscaloosa, Alabama 

http://www.va.gov/oig/pubs/VAOIG-13-02665-197.pdf 

June 9, 2014 Quality of Care Concerns Hospice/Palliative Care Program, 

Western New York Health care System, Buffalo, New York 

www.va.gov/oig/pubs/VAOIG-13-04195-180.pdf 

May 14, 2014 VA Patterns of Dispensing Take-Home Opioids and Monitoring Patients on Opioid Therapy 

http://www.va.gov/oig/pubs/VAOIG-14-00895-163.pdf 

November 7, 2013 Alleged Improper Opioid Prescription Renewal Practices, San 

Francisco VA Medical Center, San Francisco, California 

http://www.va.gov/oig/pubs/VAOIG-13-00133-12.pdf 

August 21, 2012 Management of Chronic Opioid Therapy at a VA Maine 

Health care System Community Based Outpatient Clinic 

http://www.va.gov/oig/pubs/VAOIG-12-01872-258.pdf 

August 10, 2012 Patient’s Medication Management, Lincoln Community Based 

Outpatient Clinic, Lincoln, Nebraska 

http://www.va.gov/oig/pubs/VAOIG-12-02274-244.pdf 

August 19, 2011 Alleged Improper Care and Prescribing Practices for a Veteran, Tyler VA Primary Care Clinic Tyler, Texas 

http://www.va.gov/oig/54/reports/VAOIG-11-01996-253.pdf 

June 15, 2011 Prescribing Practices in the Pain Management Clinic at John 

D. Dingell VA Medical Center, Detroit, Michigan 

http://www.va.gov/oig/54/reports/VAOIG-11-00057-195.pdf 

Chairman ISAKSON. Thank you, Dr. Daigh. Dr. Clancy, you made 

an interesting statement in your remarks I have to seize on for just 

a second. You were talking about violations of policy at VA in 

terms of over-prescription of opiates, and you made the statement 

18 

that wherever we find that taking place we will take the appropriate action, talking about discipline, I presume. 

To what extent can you terminate somebody for a continual violation in terms of over-prescribing opiates and pain relief at the 

VA? 

Dr. CLANCY. In general, there are multiple steps to this process 

and I know that some of your staff have been briefed on some recent investigations. If it came up about a single patient, the first 

step would be a peer review where their practice is reviewed by 

their peers. If this came up—and this goes on across our system 

for any kind of clinical deviation, if you will. 

We have about 15 to 20 percent of those peer reviews across our 

system routinely re-reviewed by an organization in California that 

works with us under contract for just that purpose, mostly to make 

sure that our clinicians are calibrated, because in general, they are 

rated as one of three levels. One is, the vast majority of clinicians 

would have done it exactly this way; three is, almost no one on the 

planet would have done it this way; two is sort of intermediate. 

For repeated deviations from practice, whether that is level two 

or three, or other concerns that come up, we do have procedures 

in place to actually work very closely with that clinician to see if 

the deviations can be corrected. If they cannot, then they can be 

removed from their practice. 

Chairman ISAKSON. If in that first initial peer review there is 

evidence that the over-prescription was taking place and there was 

a violation of policy, how many hoops do you still have to go 

through to terminate that individual? 

Dr. CLANCY. There are a number of steps. The first is to discuss 

that with the individual and counsel them about what is the right 

kind of practice, and so forth, and that is why we have all this expertise, to be able to bring to the attention of—I mean, this is a 

part of routine practice across all areas. 

Chairman ISAKSON. And it takes a long time? 

Dr. CLANCY. It does, it does. 

Chairman ISAKSON. The reason I asked the question is, it was 

announced this morning, I believe, at the VA that the director of 

the project in Denver, the construction of that hospital, is no longer 

with the VA and took retirement. Is that correct? 

Dr. CLANCY. Yes. 

Chairman ISAKSON. Is it easier to try and induce someone who 

has violated policy to retire or transfer to go somewhere else than 

it is to actually fire them? 

Dr. CLANCY. I think that is sometimes the case, yes. 

Chairman ISAKSON. I appreciate your great service and the great 

information you provided us with. One thing you could do for me 

and the Committee, I think, any counsel you could give us on what 

we could do as legislators to give you statutory ability to run your 

department in a responsive way, not an abusive way, but a responsive way, would be greatly appreciated. 

I think the VA is being blamed for an action that really was not 

fair because the policies and procedures are so great to go from the 

violation to termination that it is easier to try and induce somebody to transfer or somebody to just retire. If you have statutory 

impediments that we could deal with, I would love to make your 

19 

job easier and the justice more swift for our veterans in terms of 

those. If you would do that, I would appreciate it. 

Dr. CLANCY. Well, I appreciate that, Mr. Chairman. I would just 

call to your attention and those of your colleagues that there are 

really two big issues on the clinical side. One is, although it is true 

for other areas. One is having enough evidence that it will stick 

and not be overturned. 

In the example of strong concerns about a clinician’s practice, a 

good lawyer can sometimes actually help us. A settlement ends up 

being that we end up having that person do something non-clinical 

because we have so many concerns we would not want to have 

them seeing patients. That is costing the taxpayers. We definitely 

want to avoid that if we can. For other kinds of behaviors, having 

enough evidence to withstand an appeal is a big part of our issue 

as well. 

The other issue clinically is just always trying to make sure that 

for some reason, in the case of opioids, for example, there is not a 

good reason to think that perhaps a clinician selectively saw unusually complex or unusual patients. That is really why our clinician investigations have been very, very thorough in that regard. 

Chairman ISAKSON. Thank you for that response. In the interest 

of time, I will not ask another question, but I will make a comment. In Dr. Daigh’s testimony, he talks about the March 14th recommendations of the IG’s report and the six recommendations of 

the VA. I want to congratulate you on closing four of the six—that 

is a record—in a short period of time, and the two that are open 

deal with a subject you and I talked about yesterday which is urine 

testing and making sure you have the proper testing on these prescription of opiates. So, congratulations on your responsiveness to 

that. 

Dr. CLANCY. Thank you. 

Chairman ISAKSON. I will turn to the Ranking Member for his 

questions. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Thank you, Senator Isakson. First of all, 

thank you, Dr. Clancy, for acknowledging the value of a good lawyer. Rarely are good and lawyer combined in the same phrase in 

these halls, but I do appreciate your comments. I want to say that 

I appreciate your service to our Nation. You are a relatively recent 

appointee to your current position and you have been very cooperative and helpful to the Committee and to members individually, 

and I want to thank Dr. Daigh as well for your work in the Inspector General’s Office as well as members of your team. 

None of the criticisms that we are aiming at you, the panel, are 

meant to be personal to you. As you understand, they are institutional. You mentioned that the systemwide or network wide reporting will be instituted, I think you said, as of June. What will that 

system then encompass? 

Dr. CLANCY. So, that system—and in the interest of time I was 

trying to be succinct in terms of details. This consists of every single clinician getting a customized consultation, and it is not optional, combined with a review of their prescribing practices. And 

we have seen that this works very well in three networks. 

It is called academic detailing because it takes a page from a 

practice that the pharmaceutical industry has used to market their 

20 

products, where they go out and they kind of customize their pitch, 

if you will, to the needs of an individual clinician. In their case, 

they are selling a product. This is selling knowledge and skills or 

marketing, communicating. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. This is a new system that will be going 

nationwide as of June? 

Dr. CLANCY. It is not brand new, but what will be new is actually 

that it is going to be nationwide and not optional. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. That is distinct from the opioid therapy 

prescribing report that was in use earlier or is that the same 

system? 

Dr. CLANCY. It builds on it. The Opioid Safety Initiative, if you 

will, is maybe 500 or 1,000 feet off the ground. It is all about the 

knowledge and so forth. This is getting it right down to you, the 

individual clinician personally, and your patients. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Even under this new system, will the prescribing providers in the VA system be compelled to provide information to the State prescription monitoring programs, that is the 

State registries? 

Dr. CLANCY. Because I have been paying a great deal of attention 

to Wisconsin in response to concerns from Senator Baldwin and 

other members of the delegation, and we have been reporting to 

the Wisconsin State program for some time, I made the blithe assumption that we were reporting to all the State programs. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. But that is not true. 

Dr. CLANCY. Correct. We are reporting to 20 of them. We have 

identified that we have an internal disagreement among some of 

our IT folks around privacy and security issues, which we will be 

resolving very promptly. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. In some States, 20 of them—— 

Dr. CLANCY. Yes. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL [continuing]. Out of the 49 that have prescription monitoring programs—— 

Dr. CLANCY. Yes. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL [continuing]. You are providing this information to State systems, but in some 29 of them you are not doing 

so. Connecticut happens to be one where it is not occurring. 

Dr. CLANCY. That is correct. Now, obviously, resolving the difference of opinion here could lead to one of two outcomes. One, we 

immediately report to 49. The other is that we have to come up 

with an alternative solution that fits our standards for security and 

privacy. Either way, this will happen. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. I understand there are privacy concerns. 

Just to be very clear, if I am a VA patient right now in Connecticut, or those 29 other States, I can go to a private provider 

and that private provider has no way of knowing the doses of 

opioids that I am receiving through the VA system? 

Dr. CLANCY. Correct. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. It is a blind one-way source of information 

where it is working now, and if I am reading your testimony correctly, where you use the word—and I am quoting—VA providers 

can now access the State Prescription Drug Monitoring Program 

(PDMP), it is not compulsory that they do so? 

Dr. CLANCY. Is it compulsory? 

21 

[Discussion off the record with Mr. Valentino.] 

Dr. CLANCY. Not yet, but it will be. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. When? 

Dr. CLANCY. We are saying in the next 3 months. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. I would like a definite timeline. 

Dr. CLANCY. Alright. We will get back to you with a very specific 

date. I will tell you that I am very worried about this, particularly 

since I learned extremely recently that we are not reporting to all 

the State programs, because in the context of our buying more care 

out of network, either through our usual non-VA care program or 

through the Choice program, this becomes an even bigger risk for 

us and for veterans, most importantly. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. My time has expired. I have a raft of additional questions relating, for example, to the lack of revised guidelines. You and I spoke about this issue yesterday. The last guidelines were done in 2010. Even the most, I think, permissive of recommendations would say they are well due for revision in 2015, 5 

years later. 

My questions also relate to the lack of implementation of two of 

the recommendations—Dr. Daigh mentioned them—from his report 

relating to urine tests and medicine reconciliation. I am going to 

be submitting questions for the record because in the interest of my 

colleagues, I do not want to impinge on their time. 

I think there are some very urgent inquiries that need to be pursued here. Thank you very much. 

Dr. CLANCY. Well, let me just assure you we will get you responses expeditiously. The other two things I would just note is, I 

had briefly forgotten yesterday that we are participating in a broad 

HHS series of guidelines on pain management and adverse reactions to medications and so forth, and we have three or four of our 

experts who are part of that work going on. 

I do think we need to close the loop with our own guideline that 

we developed with the Department of Defense and we will be 

reaching out to those folks. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. The relationship and the coordination 

with the Department of Defense is an entirely other area that I 

was going to pursue, and I hope I will through the written questions. I might just close by saying, since you referred to a good lawyer, if you need a good lawyer to reconcile privacy concerns with 

access to VA data by State registries, I am volunteering, at least 

as a lawyer, not necessarily a good lawyer. If we need legislation 

to do it, you will have it. 

Dr. CLANCY. Thank you. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. At least you will have my commitment to 

pursue it and I hope it will be a bipartisan initiative because this 

kind of coordination of information is really essential to protecting 

veterans. You make the point, and I think it may be one of the 

most important points in this hearing, that 30 percent of people in 

America suffer from chronic pain. 

But more than 50 percent of our veterans, for obvious reasons, 

they have endured the wounds and scars of battle and they suffer 

with them for a lifetime. Providing them with responsible pain 

treatment is one of our obligations and it ought to be responsible. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

22 

Chairman ISAKSON. I think Senator Blumenthal’s willingness to 

volunteer proves that old adage that if there is a billable hour out 

there somewhere, there is always an attorney. [Laughter.] 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. I guarantee that whether I am good or 

not, my rates are very affordable, namely zero. 

Chairman ISAKSON. We will follow the early bird rule and our 

next questions will be Sen. Cassidy followed by Sen. Baldwin, followed by Sen. Tillis. 

Senator Cassidy. 

HON. BILL CASSIDY, U.S. SENATOR FROM LOUISIANA 

Senator CASSIDY. Yes, sir. Dr. Clancy, I am not so much concerned about the physician or the osteopathic physician (DO) having access to the State database, but does your pharmacist have 

access to it? When someone goes out to a private provider, sees 

that provider and gets a prescription, is that prescription filled at 

the VA pharmacy or in a private pharmacy? I do not know. I am 

asking. 

Dr. CLANCY. Sorry? 

Senator CASSIDY. If someone goes to a private provider and gets 

a prescription for an opioid, would that prescription be filled in a 

VA pharmacy or would it be filled in a community pharmacy? 

Dr. CLANCY. It would most likely be filled in a community pharmacy, in part because these medications are pretty inexpensive. So 

they could get it filled at VA if they were enrolled in our system, 

but they would have to come in and actually be seen by someone 

first, because we are not legally authorized to be dispensary. 

Senator CASSIDY. I will just echo my friend, the attorney. Clearly 

having physicians involved in that database would be important 

because I, as a physician, have learned that many patients who are 

addicted doctor shop. We all know this. They are getting a reasonable prescription here and a reasonable prescription there, but in 

aggregate, it is an unreasonable prescription. 

Let me ask second, in your testimony, you mentioned that you 

have decreased the percent of people receiving chronic opioid therapy, and I have your review paper from the American Academy of 

Neurology, and I will quote from it. Although there is evidence for 

significant short-term relief with opioid therapy, there is no substantial evidence for maintenance of pain relief or improved function over long periods of time without incurring serious risk of 

overdose, dependence, or addiction. 

Why would anybody be on long-term maintenance for non-cancer 

pain? I say that as a doctor. I used to give somebody with chronic 

pancreatitis, I may give them something for break-through pain, 

but if you will, that was acute relaxing pain. It was not chronic 

pain. I know that this is not the position paper that would state 

this. Why would anybody be, much less 370,000 people, on chronic 

opioids for non-cancer pain? You with me? 

Dr. CLANCY. Largely because we do not have easy alternatives. 

It is very easy to see the safety and adverse affects associated with 

narcotics, particularly in some case for veterans, especially combined with other medications, but we do not have a good answer 

to chronic pain that fits everyone. 

23 

Senator CASSIDY. I accept that. So, two things about that. One, 

if there is no evidence for long-term benefit, then clearly this is not 

an answer even though it is being used for 370,000 people. Do you 

follow what I am saying? Knowing that as a doc, believe me, I used 

to love to refer to pain doctors because these are such tough 

patients. 

The Academy of Neurology says there is no evidence that we 

should use it, which means it is not even a non-answer, it is a negative answer. It violates first do no harm. It seems like there 

should be stricter prescriptions, proscriptions against doctors providing it. For example, you only get it after 90 days if you get a 

waiver from the local pain doctor, sort of thing. You follow what 

I am saying? 

Dr. CLANCY. Yes. First, let me just say, starting with your last 

point, that having even more pain expertise into these decisions, I 

think, is only a good thing and I think the academic detailing approach will actually accomplish quite a bit of that. 

Many of the servicemembers who are transitioning into VA, particularly from our most recent conflicts, have substantial amounts 

of morbidity. I mean, it is a great tribute to battlefield medicine 

that the mortality for—— 

Senator CASSIDY. I accept that. 

Dr. CLANCY [continuing]. People who served in Iraq and Afghanistan is much, much lower. 

Senator CASSIDY. But again, the point is, is that there is no evidence that for non-cancer pain longer than 90 days, that risk appears to outweigh benefit. 

Dr. CLANCY. That is correct. But understand that when they 

come to VA, they have often been treated with narcotics and many 

other—— 

Senator CASSIDY. I accept that. It seems as if they would be immediately entered into a program which would begin to wean them 

from this, because again, American Academy of Neurology longterm—and I know you know this. Believe me, people come and you 

want to please them. We both know as physicians sometimes the 

best answer is no. Otherwise, it is addiction, dependence, suicide. 

Knowing that it is not efficacious for those with long—long-term 

therapy is not efficacious for those with non-cancer pain, it does 

seem like it should not be 370,000. It should be closer to 5,000 or 

something like that. 

Dr. CLANCY. I think ultimately, that is probably the right answer. The trick is, how do we actually help veterans live in a way 

where they have a quality-of-life that they can maintain. I certainly 

have had patients who, after, are trying many, many different 

things. Together we ended up with a pain contract for them to get 

chronic narcotics because nothing else quite seemed to work and 

they seemed remarkably functional. 

Senator CASSIDY. Real quickly, your testimony mentioned Cleveland having a good pain clinic, and Dr. West was helping me with 

my back problems even as we started. 

Dr. CLANCY. And no narcotics either. 

Senator CASSIDY. No narcotics. So I guess the question is, how 

successful have you been in broadening access to pain clinic doctors 

among all your different facilities? 

24 

Dr. CLANCY. What happened in Cleveland that was particularly 

exciting, and then I will ask Dr. West to comment, is that they formally implemented and tested an approach that leverages the expertise of pain management clinicians in a multi-disciplinary group 

working together and used telehealth to reach out to doctors practicing in rural areas. 

Many of our facilities have that kind of multi-disciplinary approach. This would be the major facilities, but if you live a couple 

of hours away from that, coming in periodically may not be all that 

practical. 

Senator CASSIDY. What percent of your facilities would have access to expertise such as this? 

Dr. WEST. I do not have that number right off-hand, but we—— 

Senator CASSIDY. 50 percent, 20 percent, 80 percent? Ballpark? 

Because telemedicine obviously allows you to extend this reach to 

everyone, should you make the decision. 

Dr. WEST. I would say—the vast majority of our facilities have 

access to telehealth. We are rapidly expanding our access to pain 

medicine programs. It is relatively new. It has been rolled out very 

successfully in Cleveland. It will be a published peer reviewed article very shortly. 

You brought up all the very critical points here. We need better 

access to pain physicians through our system of technology, 

through telehealth, which we do a very nice job with. We can expand access through our existing networks. 

The problem is, just as you also alluded to, there is not a whole 

lot of pain doctors out there to tap into. So we can use technology 

and leverage the advantages. We have in already forming these 

networks to network those people in and take those messages out 

to the other clinics, rural clinics—we have a huge rural population 

and a rural base—and bring that education system. 

The education system, at the end of the day, is so important because providers for so long, and mentioned in previous testimony, 

were—the training of the use of opiates was, you use opiates. Now 

we are seeing this horrible epidemic. 

Senator CASSIDY. Dr. West, I am way over, so let me just finish 

by summing up. It does seem, instead of 370,000 people, we should 

have 5,000 people because there is always the exception, and it 

does seem like telemedicine has that ability to take that reach, 

knowing your number of doctors is limited. Since I have done telemedicine in the past, you can bring it across the country. Cleveland 

can be in Baton Rouge or Lafayette or Shreveport, LA. 

Hopefully, 2 years from now, it will be 5,000 because that seems 

to be most consistent with modern medicine. I yield back and I 

apologize for going over. 

Chairman ISAKSON. Thank you, Sen. Cassidy. 

Senator Baldwin. 

HON. TAMMY BALDWIN, U.S. SENATOR FROM WISCONSIN 

Senator BALDWIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Ranking Member Blumenthal. I very much appreciate you and the Members of 

the Committee agreeing to my request to hold this hearing and for 

inviting me to participate as a non-Member of the Committee 

today. 

25 

As you have heard, in my home State of Wisconsin, the Tomah 

VA medical center is currently the subject of multiple investigations that I have called for, including the one that Dr. Clancy mentioned earlier today being conducted by the Department of Veterans Affairs Under Secretary for Health, the VA Office of Inspector General, and the Drug Enforcement Agency. 

Among other issues, these investigations are looking at disturbing allegations of improper opioid-prescribing practices, the 

subject of today’s hearing. I am going to have a chance next week 

at a field hearing in Tomah to give a longer opening statement, but 

I briefly wanted to state today that the problem of over-prescribing 

of opioids at the VA has led to tragic and real consequences for veterans, their families, and entire communities across our Nation. 

We should never lose sight of the central human dimension of 

these issues, which we in Wisconsin have been learning so much 

about. Dr. Clancy, it is my understanding as part of the opioid safety initiative that VHA has set up a central database that tracks all 

opioid prescriptions across the network. 

I would like to know if the system also tracks the prescribing of 

dangerous drug combinations, for example, opioids concurrently 

prescribed with benzodiazepines? As we saw at the Tomah VA, a 

former Marine, Jason Simcakoski tragically died last August as an 

inpatient from mixed drug toxicity. At the time of his death, he 

was reportedly on 15 different prescription drugs, including antipsychotics, tranquilizers, muscle relaxants, and opioid pain killers. 

Does the VA’s new system recognize when these dangerous combinations are being prescribed? 

Dr. CLANCY. Yes. In fact, the report that we released several 

weeks ago actually makes that available to individual clinicians so 

they can look at one screen and see this for all the patients under 

their care. 

Senator BALDWIN. So, can this system alert the providers in real 

time to stop the prescriptions? 

Dr. CLANCY. Real time here, I think, is defined as we pull the 

data. I think it is every couple of weeks right now. We are trying 

to see if we can do it daily without blowing up the rest of the network. It is pretty close to real time. 

Senator BALDWIN. So right now a couple of weeks? 

Dr. CLANCY. Yes. 

Senator BALDWIN. Who at the VA is tracking this data and who 

has use of it today? 

Dr. CLANCY. Our pharmacy benefit management service tracks 

this very carefully, and I know that we had a discussion yesterday 

about would there be some value in making this public, and I said, 

Yes, I just think it would be a little bit hard to do that in a way 

that is comprehensible, which is not in any way saying no. It is 

simply saying that we would have to do so thoughtfully, because 

the quality measures that tend to be easiest to understand are 

those where the right answer is 100 percent or zero, this is more 

nuanced. 

Senator BALDWIN. Among the allegations that are being looked 

into at the Tomah VA are early refills of prescriptions for opioids. 

Also, refills when a urine analysis indicates that a patient is negaVerDate Mar 15 2010 12:35 Jun 14, 2016 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 Z:\ACTIVE\032615.TXT PAULIN
26 

tive for use of the prescribed drugs. Can you tell me whether this 

is easily tracked with the system that you are describing? 

Dr. CLANCY. The system I am describing is actually focused on 

prescribers, but the system also does tell prescribers which of their 

patients have had a urine drug screen and when, because we will 

be monitoring that much more closely than we have been in the 

past. 

Senator BALDWIN. I am reading between the lines that it is not 

an effective tool in real time to help—— 

Dr. CLANCY. It does not slap your wrist in real time, no. It does 

tell you which of your patients, because some patients take these 

medications intermittently. Part of the idea is to get random urine 

tests as opposed to on a regular prescribed—— 

Senator BALDWIN. It would track the negative urine test, but it 

would not necessarily—I did not get the answer on early refills. 

Dr. CLANCY. Early refills should not be happening, period. I 

think one of the issues that has been surfaced at Tomah, and we 

are going to be dealing with, just still in the investigation phase, 

is the pharmacist who felt uncomfortable about that because their 

State boards generally make it very, very clear to them that this 

should not be happening, either left or they first tried to protest 

and then left the employ of that facility. 

Senator BALDWIN. In terms of the opioid safety initiative and the 

tracking system, I have two other questions on this topic. Is it acceptable practice to send a prescription to a patient at home while 

they are in inpatient at a VA facility, and would you be able to 

track that with this system? 

Mr. VALENTINO. Normally no, but a large percentage of our prescriptions go through the mail. So I could envision a system where 

a patient requested a refill and it was in the queue, and it was sent 

to them automatically, and perhaps after they ordered it and it was 

in the queue that they were admitted, and if the timing was close, 

there just would not be enough time to stop that. 

Senator BALDWIN. Maybe on an incidental basis, but if it was 

happening over a long period of time, that prescriptions were being 

sent to a home when somebody was a long-term inpatient, that 

would be—— 

Mr. VALENTINO. That would indicate there is a problem. 

Senator BALDWIN. Would the tracking system capture that? 

Mr. VALENTINO. Not the opioid safety tracking system. 

Senator BALDWIN. OK. Last, on this tracking system, does this 

link the prescriptions to the underlying diagnosis of the patient? So 

would it flag, for example, where a patient who is being seen for 

conditions other than chronic pain is receiving an opioid 

prescription? 

Dr. WEST. Yes, that is a wonderful question. The new tool that 

we have been talking about, the Opiate Therapy Risk Report, actually does. OK. So we are making it more easily accessible to front 

line providers. I mean, I am still a front line provider. I have a 

quarter-day clinic a week. And the important thing is to be able to 

get easy access to that information. 

With the new Opiate Therapy Risk Report, you can see the last 

primary care visit, last time they may have been in a substance 

abuse clinic visit, last time that they saw mental health. It also 

27 

looks at—you know, you brought it up earlier—co-morbid illnesses 

that may be a counter-indicator to contra-indicated with opiates 

such as sleep apnea. We kind of are covering the whole bases there 

with our new risk report. 

Senator BALDWIN. Mr. Chairman, I have additional questions, 

but I went way beyond my time, so either for the record or if you 

have a second round. 

Chairman ISAKSON. You owe Senator Cassidy a debt of gratitude. 

I let you go as long as he went. 

Senator BALDWIN. I will thank him on the floor. 

Chairman ISAKSON. We will leave the record open for any questions you want to submit, and for the record to reflect, I appreciate 

Senator Baldwin’s thanks for calling this hearing. Both Senators 

from the State of Wisconsin requested a hearing and both were invited to be here, and I understand Senator Johnson is going to 

come as well. We appreciate your being part of the meeting today. 

I am going to have to go to the floor in just a minute, so as I 

recognize Senator Tillis to come forward and ask his questions, I 

am going to also ask him to conduct the rest of the hearing until 

I get back, if that is OK. After Senator Tillis, Senator Manchin, 

and Senator Boozman will be the next to question. 

Senator Tillis. 

HON. THOM TILLIS, U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH CAROLINA 

Senator Tillis [Presiding.]. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am neither 

a doctor nor a lawyer. I am a management consultant, which I am 

sure is a great baseline for a joke, they walk into a bar. My question really relates to trying to reconcile some of the numbers. Senator Cassidy, said there are some 350,000 people on medications 

today and that realistically that should be 5,000. I like getting 

numbers right. 

If that is even within the realm of possibilities, what are we 

doing? Assuming that the people who are on these prescription 

medications, they are on it for one of two or three reasons: they are 

on it and they should not be; they are using it, but it is not the 

most effective treatment they can get, which is there a question 

about, is there some mis-prescribed treatment or are there other 

options that we should be providing available; and then some of 

them are doctor shopping and probably not taking the medication 

and putting it out on the market. 

Can you just give me some sense of that challenge we have now 

with this more than 300,000 people? Has there been any research 

done on what a realistic number is for the long-term use of opioids? 

Dr. CLANCY. To the best of my knowledge, there is not a number 

that comes out of all these efforts. What we know is we can continue to make progress and that is exactly what we are planning 

to do. In terms of your breakdown, Senator Cassidy is completely 

correct that there is no evidence that they are effective. Unfortunately, there is not any evidence that anything else is more 

effective. 

So, you have got a choice between drugs that do not—or other 

modalities that do not work terribly well. What we do in VA is 

make access to other alternatives more available as much as we 

can. That can be different types of rehabilitation services, particuVerDate Mar 15 2010 12:35 Jun 14, 2016 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 Z:\ACTIVE\032615.TXT PAULIN
28 

larly for musculoskeletal pain, physical therapy, sometimes chiropractic. For some types of pain, acupuncture and massage treatments like that. 

To be quite honest, to get off opioids, I think people should be 

able to try anything. The trick is whether that works or not. Acupuncture tends to be better on more peripheral types of pain than 

it does on more centralized visceral types of pain. 

That is the path that we are going down. What is likely? It feels 

like the kinds of models you might have used as a management 

consultant, but I bet—I would like to actually ask some of our experts to try to figure out how low could we go. 5,000 feels possibly 

a little too ambitious, but I do not think we should make it up. I 

think we ought to figure that out. 

Senator TILLIS. I think it is very important because to me, unless 

you have that sort of baseline target, I do not know how you develop strategies around achieving the target. It seems to me it 

would be helpful. Dr. West, you looked like you were about to say 

something. Do you have something to add? 

Dr. WEST. I always look like that. 

Senator TILLIS. OK. 

Dr. WEST. I always have something to add. I am an internist, so 

if you give me a chance, I will talk your ears off. 

Senator TILLIS. Dr. Daigh, you went back in your opening comments and you were talking about compliance numbers. It just 

seemed to be very, very low, and that was a 2012 report? 

Dr. DAIGH. It was data from fiscal year 2012. 

Senator TILLIS. OK. 

Dr. DAIGH. The report is from May 2014. 

Senator TILLIS. What does it look like in fiscal year 2014? 

Dr. DAIGH. I do not know. We would have to ask VA the data. 

That was a one-time look and we have not gone back to regenerate 

that data. 

Senator TILLIS. Is there any, based on the analysis of the fiscal 

year 2012 data, has there been any way to map what seemed to 

be unacceptable compliance numbers to individual people who need 

to be held accountable for achieving higher compliance numbers? 

To the extent the compliance numbers were so low in 2012, have 

there been any consequences or was it appropriate to have any consequences for those who were responsible at the time? 

Dr. DAIGH. For the first question, the methodology of the study, 

was a snapshot in time. It was not a longitudinal study. 

Senator TILLIS. OK. 

Dr. DAIGH. You cannot get to where you would like to go and 

where we would like to go, too. 

Senator TILLIS. Great. That is where you really need to get to? 

Dr. DAIGH. Absolutely. That study will not take you there, unfortunately. 

Senator TILLIS. OK. The last question I have is about as far off 

topic as possible, but there is probably not a day or a week, at 

least, that goes by that I do not hear from certain veterans organizations I did as Speaker of the House with respect to opioids not 

necessarily being the only source that we should look to for palliative care, for pain care, and cannabinoids come up and, in fact, we 

are having the discussion here. 

29 

To what extent have you all looked at this as a—of the 300,000 

who are currently depending on opioids, there may be some efficacy 

in consideration of cannabinoids or certain extracts for this sort of 

pain? Because I tend to agree. I do not think you get to 5,000 from 

350,000. Are there other things that you tier into there and to what 

extent do you all think that merits our consideration? Thank you. 

Dr. CLANCY. So, our clinicians cannot prescribe that by law. As 

far as I know, there is no federally-funded research—I am putting 

a small caveat on that—that looks at the effectiveness of medical 

marijuana. It has been more of a compassionate use sort of approach to make that available in some States. Frankly, putting 

that specific issue aside, which has a number of sensitivities, I 

think we should be willing to try anything. 

The other thing I would say that offers some hope for the future 

is actually not starting opioids to begin with. Most of the time we 

are not starting them, and, in fact, Defense has some very compelling studies in process right now of actually testing acupuncture in 

the field. I would guess it will not be 100 percent effective, but if 

you can delay or actually prevent the initiation of opioids, you have 

completely changed the ball game. 

I know that when they launched the studies, they were sufficiently optimistic before making a big investment in a large study 

that they went to the researcher and said, Wait a minute. Before 

we cut the check here, you need to include the component that 

talks about the training program. How would we train medics, and 

so forth, in the field to actually administer this? 

Senator TILLIS. OK. Thank you. I am going to tell myself my 

time has expired. 

Senator Manchin. 

HON. JOE MANCHIN, U.S. SENATOR FROM WEST VIRGINIA 

Senator MANCHIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Last year the VA 

found that more than half a million VA patients are abusing 

opioids. I think we have gone through all this. I am so sorry I am 

coming in late from another Armed Services meeting. VA patient 

overdose on prescription medication is double the national average, 

from what our statistics have shown. 

I have seen the tragedy first hand in West Virginia. Sadly, we 

have the highest mortality rate in the country, and the 605 percent 

increase in deaths since 1999, 605 percent. I have worked to reschedule Hydrocodone, combination drugs like Vicodin, Lortab, trying to get them from three to two. It makes the drugs a little bit 

harder to get. 

I have heard some alarming stories from my constituents, and 

often they are prescribed one drug after another. I have had people 

stop me on the street coming out of the military. When I first got 

here as a Senator, I started looking at the highest unemployment 

categories we have and it is our veterans. 

I started looking into why that might be. It is drug use. Cannot 

pass a drug test. It is an epidemic all through this country, in my 

State, and I am sure in Wisconsin, everywhere else. How well are 

your doctors trained and how well are they basically able to detect 

these types of dependencies? 

30 

I just had a person stop me on the street Saturday and say their 

husband was given certain drugs, he was complaining; he is schizophrenic, he was almost suicidal. They would not change them. They 

kept doubling down. We had to fight to get to another clinic that 

truly specializes in this away from the VA to find someone who 

could cure our problem. Now, thank God, they are living more of 

a normal life. 

So, I can tell you that some of the veterans in the State of West 

Virginia do not believe that the veterans portion of medical care is 

really expertise enough to be able to handle this. Do you find that 

to be—I am not being derogatory at all. I am just saying, what can 

we do to help? Or can we just get them to someone who has the 

expertise? 

Dr. CLANCY. What came up before you arrived, Senator—and I 

am sorry we did not get a chance to meet briefly yesterday and I 

know that you all were pulled into many votes—is, I did bring 

some data from West Virginia which I did not bring today, but I 

will make sure that your staff get a copy. 

Senator MANCHIN. It is quite high, is it not? 

Dr. CLANCY. It is, although there has been progress in terms of 

reducing the rates and the doses. One of the biggest challenges for 

veterans is both the severe injuries that many have had, musculoskeletal nerve injuries and so forth, as well as the associated Post 

Traumatic Stress and Traumatic Brain Injury. 

There are many veterans who get off opioids or down to an extremely low dose only needing it sometime who are profoundly 

grateful and appreciative and will say that their lives are transformed. There are far, far more who are very hesitant, absolutely 

resistant to even starting that journey. That is the sort of broad 

spectrum of challenges that we are dealing with. 

Senator MANCHIN. Let me ask you, as a non-medical person, it 

just makes common sense to me that if you gave me one, prescribed one, and I come back and I tell you it is not working, would 

you not take the prescription away before you gave me another? 

Does that make sense? It is so common sense to me that something 

did not work so I am going to try something else—they are telling 

me nothing ever gets taken away. 

Dr. CLANCY. That may actually be true, and I think an issue that 

we struggle with, as the rest of the country does, is that we have 

a pretty important shortage of pain management specialists and we 

are—— 

Senator MANCHIN. I mean, common sense, remove and replace. 

Dr. CLANCY. Well, you would be surprised how many times in 

medicine, actually the reason the drug is not working is they got 

the wrong dose. Giving an ineffective dose is sometimes referred to 

as homeopathic. 

Senator MANCHIN. You all recognize, I mean, it is a serious 

problem. 

Dr. CLANCY. Yes, without question. 

Senator MANCHIN. Especially, let me tell you, if you go down into 

the age groups, our highest unemployed age group is veterans 18 

to 24. 

Dr. CLANCY. Right. 

31 

Senator MANCHIN. I can assure you that is where most of addiction comes right out, and then it changes as the ages change a little bit more. Every indication is that’s where the problem is. Again, 

it goes back. Do you require patients receive mandatory counseling 

when being prescribed opiates? 

Dr. CLANCY. Yes. They now have to—and this is one of the features of the risk report that we were discussing earlier. They actually have to sign an informed consent and that is part of their 

record which walks through benefits and potential harms of these 

treatments. 

Senator MANCHIN. You are saying you are still practicing, correct, Dr. West? 

Dr. WEST. Correct. 

Senator MANCHIN. Dr. Daigh, are you still practicing? 

Dr. DAIGH. No, I am not. 

Senator MANCHIN. OK. Dr. West, how much training did you 

have in dispensing as far as pain medication? 

Dr. WEST. It is a wonderful question. When I first came out of 

residency, which was not all that long ago, none. We just were not 

trained in residency. I went to a strong academic program here. 

Senator MANCHIN. Sure. 

Dr. WEST. Now, it has significantly increased. One of the things 

I talked about earlier as well was getting this education to the primary care providers. So now primary care providers are getting the 

information. 

Senator MANCHIN. What would you say that in the VA—I am so 

sorry, my time, I will just be a second—that basically in the VA 

medical delivery system the doctors that come in, how they come, 

where they come from, would they have that expertise? 

Dr. WEST. Doctors coming into the system really are not being 

trained on pain management the way they should be. That is why 

they need to be trained. That is why VA has a responsibility to 

train those physicians and get that expertise out directly to them. 

Senator MANCHIN. Do you not think we should get advice from 

those who specialize in—— 

Dr. WEST. Absolutely. 

Senator MANCHIN [continuing]. Before you start prescribing? 

Dr. WEST. Absolutely. Getting that information out there is 

critical. 

Senator MANCHIN. No, I am saying, if I am just deploying out, 

I am 19, 20, 21, 22, and I have chronic pain or whatever other ailments I may have, would you not think I should be evaluated by 

someone who specializes in it before you give me a prescription? 

Dr. WEST. It is definitely a reasonable thing to say and again, 

the issue is we do not have a whole lot of pain providers out there. 

We are working through that and we are getting the appropriate 

education programs there. 

Senator MANCHIN. Thank you. 

Dr. CLANCY. One other thing, Senator, two things. One is, I do 

have the information so I will leave that with you, and one of your 

facilities is actually making substantial progress, particularly in 

the proportion of veterans who are on both a narcotic and another 

drug that have a particularly high risk of adverse affects. That is 

modestly good news. 

32 

Senator MANCHIN. Can you—— 

Dr. CLANCY. Absolutely, yes. We will get it to you right afterwards. Part of the challenge is that oftentimes these veterans come 

to us having been treated for many, many different conditions 

acutely. We are not starting them on those drugs to begin with. 

Many are arriving having been treated with them for a few weeks, 

months, or whatever their period is. 

Senator MANCHIN. I am not here to blame, I am really not. I am 

just looking for answers to serious problems and we want to work 

together to try to cure these problems. 

Senator TILLIS. In the interest of time, we have got another 

panel after this and I know we all have got a place to be at noon. 

Senator Boozman. 

HON. JOHN BOOZMAN, U.S. SENATOR FROM ARKANSAS 

Senator BOOZMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, all of 

you all, for being here today. I agree with you, Dr. Clancy. You 

mentioned that one of the most important things to prevent these 

problems from happening is to not prescribe them in the first place 

when they are not needed. 

The other thing, though, is that when they are prescribed—when 

they are needed—is having adequate follow up, and I think in medicine in general these days are getting better at that. Sometimes 

those safeguards have not been in place. That is where you get the 

mail order. My county sheriffs tell me that it has become a cottage 

industry, not only with veterans, but others selling pills to get a 

little extra income. 

So it is a huge problem. One of the things that appears to be 

promising, perhaps, is—is it Vivitrol? There is a drug. Am I pronouncing it correctly? 

Mr. VALENTINO. Yes. 

Senator BOOZMAN. That again blocks, from what I understand, 

blocks the receptors from getting the whatever. It is certainly not 

habit forming. The other drugs that are used, Methadone and various other things are all controlled substances and you have to 

worry about them. Can you talk a little bit about that, if we are 

using that, or the effectiveness of that? I know it is an expensive 

drug. 

Mr. VALENTINO. Yes. We are using that drug. We are also using 

other alternatives to Methadone, Suboxone and Subutex. We are 

using those. They are—— 

Senator BOOZMAN. Suboxone, again, you have to worry about becoming addicted to that, also. 

Mr. VALENTINO. Yes. Not quite as much. It has an antagonist 

along with the agonist, so it is—— 

Senator BOOZMAN. And again, correct me if I am wrong, the preliminary stories seem to be very, very positive about the other. Is 

cost the reason that we are not, perhaps, jumping in with both 

feet? 

Mr. VALENTINO. Regarding Vivitrol? 

Senator BOOZMAN. Yes. 

Mr. VALENTINO. It is expensive, but it is not horribly expensive. I think it is about $500 per month. So it is not like a Hepatitis C 

drug or other drugs. So no, I do not think cost is the issue. When 

33 

new therapies are introduced in medicine, there is a lag. People 

have to get comfortable with how to prescribe, how to monitor. 

We do have guidance out for the drug. It is on our formulary. We 

have seen a pretty dramatic up tick in its utilization over the last 

6 months. 

Senator BOOZMAN. Good. again, perhaps we can get some evidence based on what are the most effective of these. I am concerned about the transition. You know, you will have individuals 

in the military, active duty transitioning to the VA and these individuals are having problems over a period of a great deal of time. 

Sometimes you finally get them on a formulary that works and 

then you come to the VA and they are told we do not have the particular drugs they need. 

Dr. Tuchschmidt was in on Tuesday and said there is the opportunity to override that. I guess my question is, how long does it 

take? Are we actually using the ability to override or are these individuals basically saying come back in a few weeks, we cannot do 

this? 

Dr. CLANCY. We are just arguing about who gets to say yes first, 

but yes. 

Mr. VALENTINO. Yes. 

Senator BOOZMAN. But that has been a no in the past or a difficult yes. 

Mr. VALENTINO. We have not had a policy in the past, but we 

have actually had a practice in the past of continuing pain medication—— 

Senator BOOZMAN. I do not mean to interrupt, but the practice 

is such that when we have these families come in, that is kind of 

the common thread in the sense that many times they cannot get 

the medicines that they need and are frustrated. 

Mr. VALENTINO. Yes, I understand that concern. When somebody 

comes in from DOD, we have to take a look at their medications 

that they are on. For example, in particular with what we are talking about here, if somebody comes in on an opiate and a 

benzodiazepine, the VA physician is really compelled to take a close 

look at that and probably stop one or the other or both. 

A lot of these drugs in mental health have changed—— 

Senator BOOZMAN. Is that because the DOD physician is not 

doing a good job? 

Mr. VALENTINO. I am not saying that. Patients’ conditions change 

over time, and perhaps what was initiated at one point is no longer 

the best therapy because patients’ conditions have changed, other 

things have changed. 

Dr. CLANCY. Their focus is acute in its short term. Right? So 

opioids usually work great for people in the short term. 

Senator BOOZMAN. No, I understand. 

Dr. CLANCY. It is the longer term. 

Senator BOOZMAN. Yes and no. Some of these, they have been 

kind of fiddling with and getting them fine-tuned where they can 

live with whatever they are doing. Would it not make sense, with 

some of these drugs for specific things like that—and I do not know 

what the expense is. Would it not make sense to mesh the 

formulary? 

34 

Dr. CLANCY. We have a very clear agreement and commitment 

before transitioning servicemembers, particularly focused on those 

who are on mental health medications, that there will be no change 

until they have had an opportunity to be evaluated. 

We continue those medications, depending on the clinical circumstances of the individual, a former servicemember now veteran. 

Some of those drugs may be continued and we can do that in our 

formulary. I think that we prescribe or have the opportunity to prescribe about 96 percent of what is in the DOD formulary. 

What we are really focusing on is a veteran-centered approach at 

that time of transition, because with all the other things you have 

to deal with, to be told that, Oh, no, thank you, we think we will 

give you different medications now, is not actually helpful. 

Senator BOOZMAN. Thank you, Dr. Clancy. Thank you, Mr. 

Chairman. 

Senator TILLIS. Thank you. 

Senator Johnson. 

HON. RON JOHNSON, U.S. SENATOR FROM WISCONSIN 

Senator JOHNSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to 

thank you and the Committee for allowing Senator Baldwin and I 

to come and participate in this because this is, obviously, an issue 

that is striking dear to our hearts here in Wisconsin. I would like 

to thank you, Dr. Clancy, for responding to my letter, and certainly 

starting your own investigation in terms of the problems at Tomah. 

Senator Manchin would say, and we all recognize this is a serious problem, I guess I just want to ask, how long has the VA recognized the potential of opiate overdosing or over-prescription to be 

a problem? 

Dr. CLANCY. We have recognized it since at least 2012 and 

launched a very serious initiative starting in 2013, and we are now 

upping that. Upping it is probably the wrong way to say it. We are 

renewing the focus on it to get it right down to ground level for 

each individual prescriber and their patient panel. 

Senator JOHNSON. How long have you been at the VA? 

Dr. CLANCY. I have been there for a year and a half. 

Senator JOHNSON. OK. Dr. Daigh, how long have you been in the 

Inspector General’s Office? 

Dr. DAIGH. About 12 years. 

Senator JOHNSON. About 12 years. How long have you been 

aware, or the Inspector General’s Office, how long have they been 

aware that opiate over-prescription may be a problem? 

Dr. DAIGH. I think if you look through our hotlines for as long 

as I have been at the VA, it has been a problem. And the reason 

that we did the national review in 2012 was that it has been my 

experience that in order to get VA to respond and make change, 

I need national data. We put a tremendous amount of effort into 

providing a national report to demonstrate at least what we think 

the level of the problem is and then encourage VHA to move 

forward. 

Senator JOHNSON. How long have you been aware, or the Office 

of Inspector General, and/or, been aware of the problems at the 

Tomah facility? When were you first hearing of these problems? 

35 

Dr. DAIGH. In recent time, that would be the first time Tomah 

has come up to me. We got a hotline allegation in roughly 2011, 

and I can give you a timeline, and that allegation of improper care 

to providers at Tomah was sent to the VISN director to respond to. 

Historically, I have produced about 60 hotlines a year. I write 

about one hotline a week, is about what I can publish for manpower. The OIG gets roughly 50,000 contacts and that distills down 

to, in 2014, 2,400 health care issues. So, in the triage process, I 

sent that to the VISN director and the VISN director responded to 

those allegations, essentially saying they found no problems at 

Tomah. 

About a month or two later, we got another hotline. Again, I can 

provide the data. 

Senator JOHNSON. OK. Now, I do not want to get into the whole 

thing right now. 

Dr. DAIGH. OK. 

Senator JOHNSON. The Office of Inspector General first became 

aware of problems at Tomah in terms of potential opiate over-prescription in 2011? Are you looking in a more robust fashion in 

terms of possibly knowing before that? This is when you were first 

aware of it. Are you checking either the Inspector General’s Office 

or within the VA in terms of previous reports of problems with 

Tomah? 

It may be even beyond opiate over-prescription. Allegations of intimidation? How long has that been known? Are you inspecting 

that right now? Are you launching an investigation in terms of how 

long this has been known? 

Dr. DAIGH. I would say in recent time, roughly 2011 timeframe, 

is when we became of those issues. 

Senator JOHNSON. Are you going to launch an investigation to 

see if this was known sooner to hold people accountable? 

Dr. DAIGH. So in order—— 

Senator JOHNSON. Just simply yes or no. Are you going to? 

Dr. DAIGH. I am not planning to go back further. 

Senator JOHNSON. Dr. Clancy, are you going to look into how 

long this has been known? 

Dr. CLANCY. Yes. Right now we have got two rigorous investigations going on. One is being done by an entity that Secretary 

McDonald and the Deputy set up called the Office of Accountability 

and Review. Historically, VA has 150 facilities and many clinics 

and so forth, so highly decentralized and for many policies, including HR, was pretty decentralized or federated, if you will. 

The whole purpose of this Office of Accountability and Review, 

fondly known as OAR, is to hold senior leaders in particular accountable. Part of that investigation will also include any previous 

allegations or issues that have surfaced. 

Senator JOHNSON. OK. My time is up. Dr. Daigh, one of the 

things we have been trying to work with the Office of Inspector 

General. Certainly sensitive to the privacy issues, that type of 

thing. We also are conducting our own investigation as part of my 

Committee. That is my responsibility. 

We are going to require some of these files so we can do our own 

investigation to find out how far this went back, when it was 

known, who knew it so we can, first and foremost, the number 1 

36 

goal here is to make sure these tragedies never happen to another 

veteran or their families, but also to find out who knew what when 

and hold those individuals accountable. 

I am hoping that the Office of Inspector General actually cooperates with the Committee as we undertake our responsibility to do 

our own investigation as well. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL [presiding]. I think that concludes the 

questioning. Just to let you know, both Senator Isakson and Senator Tillis are on the floor where they have to be right now. So, I 

have been asked to take over as Chairman. 

In the interest of time since we only have about half an hour left, 

I am going to invite Senator Baldwin to submit any additional 

questions she may have for the record. I want to thank her for 

being here today, as well as Senator Johnson, and ask the second 

panel to please come forward. 

RESPONSE TO POSTHEARING QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. BERNARD SANDERS TO

CAROLYN CLANCY, M.D., INTERIM UNDER SECRETARY FOR HEALTH, VETERANS

HEALTH ADMINISTRATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

In Vermont, naturopathic doctors are licensed as primary care physicians by the 

state of Vermont. Only physicians licensed by the state may call themselves naturopaths, naturopathic physicians, naturopathic doctors, or use the initials ‘‘ND’’ after 

their name. In order to be licensed by the state of Vermont, naturopathic physicians 

must graduate from an approved naturopathic medical school, pass medical board 

exams, and fulfill continuing medical education requirements. 

Other states that license naturopathic physicians include Maine, New Hampshire, 

Connecticut, California, Arizona, Montana, Oregon, Hawaii, Washington, Utah, 

Alaska, Idaho, Kansas, Minnesota and the District of Columbia. 

Question 1. Since naturopathic physicians are trained in a variety of diagnostic 

and therapeutic modalities, is the VHA considering hiring certified naturopathic 

physicians to augment VA medical facilities’ pain management clinics? 

Response. VA has no legal authority under 38 U.S.C. 7402(b) to appoint certified 

naturopathic physicians unless they otherwise meet the degree and licensure requirements of that section. For those that do, the problem remains that no mechanism currently exists by which VA can credential them to practice within VHA as 

naturopathic physicians. However, alternative medicine strategies are currently 

being actively incorporated into VHA’s inventory of treatments for chronic, refractory pain syndromes. These emphasize non-pharmacologic approaches and include 

modalities such as acupuncture, massage therapy, and yoga. 

RESPONSE TO POSTHEARING QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. MAZIE K. HIRONO TO

CAROLYN CLANCY, M.D., INTERIM UNDER SECRETARY FOR HEALTH, VETERANS

HEALTH ADMINISTRATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

VA OPIOID SAFETY INITIATIVE

Question 2. You mention in your testimony that the Opioid Safety Imitative has 

been in place since 2013. What failed with the program in Wisconsin? How can you 

be sure it is effective across the country? 

Response. The Opioid Safety Initiative (OSI) was not fully functional during the 

time the Tomah events occurred. VA’s initial focus for the Opioid Safety Initiative 

(OSI) was to identify and take corrective action for Veterans Integrated Service Networks (VISNs) that were outliers on the OSI metrics. VA then shifted its focus to 

identify and take corrective action for individual facilities that were outliers on the 

OSI metrics. VA is now focusing on identifying and taking corrective action on individual providers who appear to be outliers on the OSI metrics. This current focus 

is complex because administrative databases do not lend themselves well to conducting the type of analysis that is necessary to accurately identify inappropriate 

prescribing. For example, a pain management specialist, a hospice care provider or 

an oncologist may ‘‘appear’’ to be an outlier, when in actuality their prescribing may 

indeed be clinically appropriate. VA is working through these issues now to develop 

a reliable way to identify potential cases of inappropriate prescribing practices so 

that local review, validation and intervention, if necessary, can occur. 

37 

Going forward, VA will ensure enhancements to the OSI enable identification at 

the national level of individual provider prescribing patterns. The OSI will also become a more useful tool when augmented by VA’s mandated deployment of the Academic Detailing Program. The Academic Detailing program is designed to provide 

the infrastructure and processes needed for VISNs, facilities, and individual providers to achieve safe and appropriate opioid prescribing practices and consumption. 

Each VISN will submit its first Academic Detailing Program progress report to the 

Under Secretary for Health by September 30, 2015. 

Nationally, the Opioid Safety Initiative (OSI) has been effective. From Quarter 4, 

Fiscal Year 2012 (beginning in July 2012) to Quarter 2, Fiscal Year 2015 (ending 

in March 2015) there are: 109,862 fewer patients receiving opioids; 33,871 fewer patients receiving opioids and benzodiazepines together; 74,995 more patients on 

opioids that have had a urine drug screen to help guide treatment decisions; and 

91,760 fewer patients on long-term opioid therapy. The overall dosage of opioids is 

decreasing in the VA system as 12,278 fewer patients are receiving greater than or 

equal to 100 Morphine Equivalent Daily Dosing (MEDD). The desired results of the 

OSI have been achieved during a time that VA has seen an overall growth of 90,488 

patients that have utilized VA outpatient pharmacy services. 

We are confident that individual provider-level enhancements to the OSI, coupled 

with the Academic Detailing Program will foster safer and more appropriate opioid 

treatments. 

VA’S COORDINATION WITH STATES

Question 3. While you tout coordination with states that have monitoring programs, testimony provided here seems to indicate a lack of actual coordination— 

what reassurances can you offer that the VA is actually following through on all 

of these protocols and efforts and not just paying lip service to the very real issue 

of opioid abuse? 

Response. VA’s State PDMP is a new capability to share prescription drug information, including opiate prescription data, with the PDMP of each state in the country that has a drug monitoring program in place. VA is participating with all states 

with which it is able to. PDMP deployment is now complete at 29 states; deployment 

of the system to 6 additional states is currently underway; Missouri is the only state 

without a PDMP; and 1 state is not yet ready to accept data from VA (New Mexico). 

Thirteen states have data, communication, or format issues that need to be resolved 

before VA prescription drug information can be shared with them (New York, Massachusetts, Illinois, California, Indiana, Rhode Island, Iowa, Nebraska, Michigan, 

West, Virginia, Nevada, Texas, and Montana). VA is conducting a state-by-state assessment of these 13 states to determine the specific requirements for data transfers 

of VA prescription drug information, and VA is working to secure funding and contracts to support the changes needed. 

Additionally, VHA is currently drafting a new directive titled, which will establish 

policy requiring VHA health care provider participation in State Prescription Drug 

Monitoring Programs, consistent with applicable state laws. 

VA’S POLICY ON PRESCRIBING SUBOXONE

Question 4. Are you monitoring the Suboxone so it’s not being misused or 

untracked? 

Response. Yes. Monitoring of adherence at a minimum involves routine urine drug 

screens for metabolites of buprenorphine/naloxone (Suboxone) to confirm recent ingestion of the medication. When clinically indicated based on patient symptoms and 

function, providers also use pill counts to determine if patients have possession of 

doses prescribed for future use. Some clinics institute random calls for patients to 

present within 24 hours for medication counts and alert patients to this procedure 

as a standard part of the treatment consent process. Patients without the appropriate doses in their possession have adjustments to their treatment plan such as 

more frequent monitoring or enrollment in an Opioid Treatment Program with dispensing of medication observed daily. 

RESPONSE TO POSTHEARING QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. TAMMY BALDWIN TO

CAROLYN CLANCY, M.D., INTERIM UNDER SECRETARY FOR HEALTH, VETERANS

HEALTH ADMINISTRATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

Question 5. VA Prescribing Standards 

Your clinical review findings for Phase 1 of your investigation into the Tomah 

medical facility found that Tomah patients were 2.5 times more likely than the naVerDate Mar 15 2010 12:35 Jun 14, 2016 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 Z:\ACTIVE\032615.TXT PAULIN
38 

tional average to be prescribed opioids greater than 400 morphine equivalents per 

day and were more likely than the national average to be prescribed opioid doses 

between 200–300 morphine equivalents per day. With respect to the use of benzodiazepines and opioids concurrently, which is discouraged due to risks of complications, your team found that Tomah was almost double the national average. 

a. In your opinion, are these prescribing practices at Tomah appropriate? 

Response. Since the prescribing practices at Tomah are at the core of VA’s ongoing investigation, we are unable to offer a formal opinion on the matter at this time. 

However, the clinical review findings for Phase 1 of the VA investigation found 

mixed results in the use of opioids at the Tomah VAMC. From the fiscal quarter 

beginning in July 2012 to the fiscal quarter ending in December 2014 the percent 

of pharmacy users receiving an opioid decreased 6% (2,124 to 1,994 Veterans), while 

the national percentage decreased 13% (679,376 to 587,762 Veterans). The percent 

change for this metric must be considered within the context that Tomah has a 

lower percentage of Veterans receiving an opioid compared to the rest of the VA. 

The percent of pharmacy users receiving an opioid or tramadol who are also receiving a benzodiazepine decreased 9% (611 to 554 Veterans), while the national percentage decreased 24% (122,633 to 93,352 Veterans). The percent of pharmacy users 

receiving opioids for longer than 90 days who also received a urine drug screen to 

monitor treatment increased 36% (453 to 712 Veterans, while the national percentage increased 31% (160,601 to 231,856 Veterans). The percent of pharmacy users 

who are receiving doses of opioids greater than or equal to 100 MEDD has not 

changed (274 Veterans), while the national percentage decreased 17% (59,499 to 

49,356 Veterans). 

b. Are these prescribing practices at Tomah consistent with VHA’s clinical practice guidelines for prescribing opioids; for prescribing benzodiazepines; and for prescribing both drugs concurrently? 

Response. VA is deeply concerned with and is actively addressing the overuse and 

dependence on opioid medications by Veterans. After many years of promoting the 

aggressive treatment of pain with powerful opioid analgesics, the United States is 

in the midst of an epidemic of misuse and abuse of opioid analgesics. The extent 

and complexity of our Nation’s Veterans multiple chronic pain conditions, including 

many severe battlefield injuries associated with blasts and co-morbid Traumatic 

Brain Injury and/or psychological conditions such as depression and Post Traumatic 

Stress Disorder, often make effective pain management clinically challenging and 

increase the risks for complications due to both over- and under-treatment with 

opioids and other therapies. 

Per VHA clinical practice guidelines, the use of benzodiazepines and opioids concomitantly is discouraged due to risks of complications, including apnea and death. 

The clinical review findings for Phase 1 of our investigation suggest that Clinical 

Practice Guidelines (CPGs) for chronic opioid therapy may have not been correctly 

followed. However, as previously stated, our investigation is ongoing and we are unable to offer a formal opinion on the matter at this time. 

In the months following the clinical review findings for Phase 1 of the VA investigation at Tomah VAMC, the medical center has been vigorously pursuing implementation of the Opioid Safety Initiative (OSI) similar to other VA facilities to ensure optimal pain management and to safeguard Veterans from harm inherent in 

high-risk medications such as opioids and benzodiazepines. The objective of OSI is 

to make the totality of opioid use visible at all levels in the organization with a particular emphasis on identifying and remediating prescribing practices that place 

Veterans at increased risk for adverse outcomes. To assist Veterans, providers and 

clinical teams in achieving OSI goals for safer opioid prescribing practices, an interdisciplinary VHA Task Force assembled a 15 module, peer-reviewed OSI Toolkit 

that is continually updated as new information becomes available, including new 

evidence-based practices. The OSI Toolkit is accessible to all VHA clinicians and disseminated widely and repeatedly through multiple communication channels and 

educational formats to facilitate safe opioid prescribing practices. 

– If yes, do you believe the relevant VHA clinical practice guidelines should be 

revised? 

Response. We agree that it would be useful to update the guidelines with the latest evidence; a Chronic/Long Term Opioid Therapy Clinical Practice Guideline Panel 

is scheduled to begin this work in September/October 2015. However, considerable 

work has already been completed in developing specific guidance for safe opioid prescribing in the Opioid Safety Initiative Toolkit, which has been widely disseminated 

to VHA clinicians. These documents can be found on the VA Pain Management 

Intranet Site, http://vaww.va.gov/PAINMANAGEMENT/index.asp. 

39 

– If no, what actions do you recommend to bring facilities like Tomah into compliance? 

Response. Suggested actions would include a clinical consultation by an expert 

team followed by action plans to establish competent stepped clinical care for pain 

in primary care and in specialty care, as articulated in VHA Directive 2009–053. 

The Tomah VAMC and VISN 12 leadership are committed to providing the best 

pain management to Veterans, who need such care. Specific steps taken at Tomah 

in past three months include: 

• Implementation of pain resource folder in computerized medical record that is 

easily accessible to providers; • Provider training on how to better leverage VHA’s on-line opiate safety tools; • Hiring a tracking nurse to help monitor and track Urine Drug Screen results 

and actions as part of a continuous monitoring/monitoring maintenance plan; and • Provider education: in additional to academic detailing, VISN 12 has sponsored 

a pain management workshop on June 3, 2015. 

c. When was the last time the VHA updated the relevant clinical practice guidelines? 

Response. The current VA/DOD Management of Opioid Therapy Clinical Practice 

Guideline (CPG) was updated in 2010. A CPG update kick-off meeting is scheduled 

for August 2015. Dr. Jack Rosenberg (VHA National Pain Management Strategy Coordinating Committee) has agreed to be the VA’s champion for this update. As part 

of the CPG development/update process a thorough evidence review and synthesis 

will be conducted. Inclusion or exclusion of the CDC’s updated prescribing guideline 

will be dependent on the evidence synthesis and the work groups recommendations 

at that time. 

d. The Center for Disease Control and Prevention plans to update its guidelines 

for opioid prescribing practices in the near future. Does the VHA currently use the 

CDC’s prescribing guidelines and does the VHA plan to incorporate CDC’s updated 

prescribing guidelines when they are complete? 

Response. The current VA/DOD Management of Opioid Therapy Clinical Practice 

Guideline (CPG) was updated in 2010. A CPG update kick-off meeting is scheduled 

for August 2015. Dr. Jack Rosenberg (VHA National Pain Management Strategy Coordinating Committee) has agreed to be the VA’s champion for this update. As part 

of the CPG development/update process a thorough evidence review and synthesis 

will be conducted. Inclusion or exclusion of the CDC’s updated prescribing guideline 

will be dependent on the evidence synthesis and the work groups recommendations 

at that time. 

Question 6. VA Prescribing Guidance and Continuing Medical Education for Providers 

In Dr. Forster’s testimony, she notes how Kaiser Permanente distributes ‘‘clear 

and concise protocols’’ to providers so they can identify and take action to stop inappropriate prescription narcotic use, including drug diversion or drug seeking behaviors. Dr. Forster also notes that Kaiser offers continuing education to providers on 

this issue. Based on what I’ve learned from prescribing practices at Tomah and from 

multiple GAO reports on the VHA system, it appears that VHA lacks similar ‘‘clear 

and concise protocols,’’ or what it does have is not implemented effectively or consistently followed. 

• What protocols does VHA distribute to doctors, nurses and pharmacists so they 

can spot and prevent opioid abuse? • Does VHA have continuing education programs so providers can stay up on the 

latest trends and tools? 

Response. VHA has multiple projects, coordinated under the National Pain Program (NPP) Office, to support and educate clinicians and Veterans about safe and 

effective pain management, including use of opioids, such as: the Opioid Safety Initiative (OSI), the Joint Pain Education and Training Project (JPEP) with the Department of Defense (DOD), the Pain Mini-Residency, Pain SCAN-ECHO, asynchronous web-based training, and Community of Practice calls which providers may 

elect to take but which are not required. These programs have presentations on universal precautions and risk management, including clinical evaluation, written informed consent, screening such as urine drug monitoring, use of state monitoring 

programs, and safe tapering. 

In recognition of the clinical challenges to successfully manage pain and prescribe 

medication safely for our Veterans while implementing the Opioid Safety Initiative 

(OSI) Directive and the Informed Consent Directive, the NPP Office convened a national task force to create an OSI Toolkit (evidence-based to the extent possible) to 

help guide the field. The OSI Toolkit Task Force (Task Force) is comprised of experienced experts from pain management, pharmacy, primary care, and mental health 

40 

and is charged to systematically peer-review and standardize clinical education and 

patient education materials for distribution throughout the VHA in support of OSI 

goals. In developing the OSI Toolkit, completed October 2014, the Task Force met 

in weekly conferences over several months to create content which was then merged 

with Pharmacy Benefits Management Academic Detailing Program Office product 

development. The resulting Toolkit contains documents, some in presentation form, 

that can aid in clinical decisions about starting, continuing or tapering opioid therapy and other challenges related to safe opioid prescribing. These documents can be 

found on the VA Pain Management Intranet Site, http://vaww.va.gov/ 

PAINMANAGEMENT/index.asp, or on the Adobe SharePoint Site, https://va-eercees.adobeconnect.com/osi/ 

OSI TOOLKIT TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Pain Management Opioid Safety—Education Guide (Academic Detailing) 

a. Introduction—Chronic Pain Management: Reducing Harm While Helping 

the Hurting Veteran. pp. 1–2 

b. Chronic Pain Treatment Strategies pp. 3–6 

c. Universal Precautions in Opioid Therapy pp. 4–11 

d. Discussing Pain Management p. 12 

e. High Dose Opioid Therapy pp. 12–14 

f. High risk Medication Combinations p. 15 

g. Opioid Reduction and Discontinuation pp. 16–17 

2. Pain Management Opioid Safety—Quick Reference Guide (Academic Detailing) 

a. Tools for Opioid Risk Classification pp. 1–2 

b. Urine Drug Screening pp. 3–9 

c. Opioid dosing p. 10 

d. Methadone p. 11 

e. Opioid Rotation pp. 12–14 

f. Opioid Adverse Effects pp. 15–17 

g. Opioid Dose Reduction or Discontinuation p. 18 

h. Benzodiazepine Dose Reduction or Discontinuation p. 19 

i. Non Opioid Agents for Acute and Chronic pain pp. 20–21. 

3. Clinical Considerations when caring for patients on Opioids and Benzodiazepines 

4. Effective Treatment for PTSD—Clinician Handout 

5. Effective Treatment for PTSD—Patient Handout 

6. Helping Patients Taper Benzodiazepines—Clinician Handout 

7. Helping Patient Taper Benzodiazepines—Patient Handout on Opioid Dose Reduction. Fact Sheet 

8. Final, IMed Consent Opioid Directive–1005. Rationale 

9. Frequently asked questions (FAQ): Informed Consent for Long Term Opioid 

Therapy Directive (VHA 2014–1005) 

10. Shared Medical Appointment. Taking Opioids Responsibly. Education Visit 

Template—Power Point 

11. Written and Informed Consent for Long Term Opioid Therapy—Shared Medical Appointment—Power Point 

12. Pain management opioid safety guide 91314—Power Point 

13. Patient Information Guide on Long-term Opioid Therapy for Chronic Pain— 

Power Point 

Senator BLUMENTHAL [presiding]. Let me dispense with lengthy 

introductions in the interest of time. We have votes scheduled for 

noon. Thank you to our staff for so quickly arranging for you to 

come forward. 

We are very pleased and grateful to welcome G. Caleb Alexander, 

who is not only an M.D., but Co-Director of the Center for Drug 

Safety and Effectiveness at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of 

Public Health; Carol Forster, also a doctor, M.D., Physician Director of Pharmacy and Therapeutics/Medication Safety at the Mid-Atlantic Permanente Medical Group of Kaiser Permanente; and John 

Gadea, Director of the Drug Control Division at the Connecticut 

Department of Consumer Protection. 

41 

We are thankful to all of you. Let us proceed with your opening 

statements. Thank you. 

STATEMENT OF G. CALEB ALEXANDER, M.D., CO-DIRECTOR, 

CENTER FOR DRUG SAFETY AND EFFECTIVENESS, JOHNS 

HOPKINS BLOOMBERG SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH 

Dr. ALEXANDER. Good morning, Ranking Member Blumenthal 

and Senator Baldwin. The opinions expressed here are my own and 

do not necessarily reflect the views of Johns Hopkins University, 

and I thank you for inviting me. 

Doctors of my generation were taught not to worry about the addictive potential of opioids if a patient had true pain. Although 

well-intentioned, doctors have contributed to soaring opioid use. We 

have heard some of the statistics. Another one is that enough 

opioids were prescribed last year in the United States to provide 

every adult a 4-week, round-the-clock, continuous supply of 

Vicodin. 

Abuse of opioids has become an epidemic that devastates America’s families, and we have lost far too many lives from this epidemic, more than twice the number of Americans as have died in 

the Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan wars combined. A core contributor to this epidemic is that doctors and patients continue to overestimate the benefits and under-estimate the risks of these 

products. 

In my testimony I would like to mention three important steps 

to address this problem, and I also discuss several popular ideas 

that I am concerned may distract us from the primary cause of this 

epidemic. 

First, we need to improve prescribing practices. Best practices for 

opioid use have been described. Doctors need to be more cautious 

with opioid initiation as well as use over longer durations and with 

higher doses. They need to limit the use of fentanyl and methadone 

for pain. They need to use multi-disciplinary teams that incorporate non-pharmacologic pain treatments. 

They need to avoid combining opioids with medicines such as 

benzodiazepines and barbiturates. These approaches are especially 

vital among individuals with mood disorders such as depression, 

Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, Traumatic Brain Injury, or substance abuse since we know that high risk use and adverse outcomes are both more common among these patients. 

To improve practice, it is also vital to improve the measurement 

and accessibility of data about opioid utilization and prescribing at 

a patient, provider, clinic, and health system level. Such measurements allow for bench marking and enhance our understanding of 

practices contributing to opioid misuse and overdose deaths. 

Second, we need to help people who are addicted to opioids access 

effective treatment. Treatment with the medicines buprenorphine 

and methadone is the most effective means of helping individuals 

regain control of their lives and avoid overdose. 

Yet, despite over five million Americans with opioid dependence, 

fewer than one in five are currently receiving available treatments. 

There is too little provider interest. There are too many regulatory 

and payment barriers to access the most effective remedies. 

42 

Third, we need to help people get rid of opiates that they do not 

need. It is stunning that these drugs are so easy to get, and yet, 

so difficult to get rid of. There are millions of pounds of unwanted 

and unused medicines sitting in bathroom cabinets and bedroom 

night stands all over America. 

The DEA recently finalized its rules regarding the disposal of 

controlled substances, and properly implemented, I believe that 

these take-back programs can serve an important role in reducing 

opioid-related injuries and deaths. 

Other tools may be valuable, but I am cautious because the scientific evidence to support them is limited. Urine testing, for example, may be reasonable to routinely apply in practice, but urine 

tests do not reduce the addictive potential of opioids and they do 

not change the overall unfavorable risk/benefit balance for many, 

many current users. 

The FDA and manufacturers are also pursuing so-called abuse 

deterrent formulations to re-engineer medicines to reduce their 

abuse potential. I would also approach this strategy with substantial caution. While these re-engineered medicines are designed to 

thwart abuse, their active chemical ingredients are no less addictive and most people that are abusing or addictive to these medicines swallow them whole. 

Moreover, our research suggests that prescribers may over-estimate the safety of abuse deterrent formulations. I am not convinced that we can engineer our way out of this problem. Some 

have framed efforts to rein in runaway prescribing as a threat to 

quality of care for those with chronic pain. As a practicing physician, I can assure you nothing could be farther from the truth. 

An overwhelming amount of evidence supports that compatibility 

of effective pain treatment with reducing opioid prescribing. High 

quality care for patients in pain is not jeopardized by such efforts. 

High quality care demands it. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I look forward to your questions. 

[Opioid Prescribing: A Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal 

of Guidelines for Chronic Pain from the Annals of Internal Medicine appears in the Appendix.] 

[The Prescription Opioid and Heroin Crisis: A Public Health Approach to an Epidemic of Addiction appears in the Appendix.] 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Alexander follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF G. CALEB ALEXANDER, MD, MS, CO-DIRECTOR, JOHNS

HOPKINS CENTER FOR DRUG SAFETY AND EFFECTIVENESS

Good morning Chairman Isakson, Ranking Member Blumenthal and Members of 

the Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. 

I am a practicing internist and prescription drug expert at the Johns Hopkins 

Bloomberg School of Public Health, where I co-direct the Johns Hopkins Center for 

Drug Safety and Effectiveness. The opinions expressed herein are my own and do 

not necessarily reflect the views of Johns Hopkins University. 

Doctors of my generation were taught not to worry about the addictive potential 

of opioids if a patient had true pain. Although well intentioned, many doctors have 

unwittingly contributed to soaring opioid use * * * so much so that enough opioids 

are prescribed each year to provide every adult in the United States a 4-week round 

the clock supply of Vicodin. 

I know that you are well aware of the devastating consequences of this epidemic 

on America’s families. We have lost far too many lives—more than twice the number 

of Americans as have died in the Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan wars combined— 

and these deaths are the tip of the iceberg. Although there are many contributors 

43 

to this epidemic, a core problem is that doctors and patients continue to overestimate the benefits of opioids and underestimate their risks. 

In my testimony, I would like to mention three important steps to address this 

problem. I will also discuss several popular ideas that I am concerned may take our 

eyes off the ball. 

First, we need to continue to improve prescribing practices. Best practices for 

opioid use have been described—including cautious use with longer durations or 

higher doses, limiting the use of fentanyl patches and methadone for pain, incorporating multidisciplinary pain management teams, and avoiding the combination 

of opioids with medicines such as benzodiazepines. These approaches are especially 

vital among patients with comorbid conditions such as mood disorders, Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) or substance use, since 

high-risk opioid use and adverse outcomes are both more common among these 

patients. 

To improve practices, it is also vital that we continue to improve the measurement 

and accessibility of data about opioid utilization and prescribing at a patient, provider, clinic and health system level. Such measurements allow for benchmarking 

and enhance our understanding of practices contributing to opioid misuse and overdose deaths. 

Second, we need to help people who are addicted to opiates access effective treatment. Treatment with the medicines buprenorphine and methadone is the most effective means of helping individuals regain control of their lives and avoid death by 

overdose, yet despite over 5 million Americans with opioid dependence, fewer than 

1 in 5 are receiving available treatments due to low provider interest and a variety 

of regulatory and payment barriers. 

Third, we need to vastly expand opportunities for people to get rid of opiates that 

they do not need. It is stunning that these drugs are so easy to get, yet so difficult 

to get rid of. There are literally millions of pounds of unwanted and unused medicines sitting in kitchen drawers, bathroom cabinets and bedroom nightstands all 

over America. The DEA recently finalized its rules regarding the disposal of controlled substances, and properly implemented, I believe that these ‘‘take back’’ programs can serve an important role in reducing opioid-related injuries and deaths. 

Other risk mitigation methods such as patient contracts, risk assessment tools 

and urine testing are increasingly common. Despite their appeal, the scientific evidence to support them is limited. Although some of these approaches, such as urine 

testing, may be reasonable to routinely implement in clinical practice, such measures do not reduce the addictive potential of these products, nor do they change the 

overall unfavorable risk/benefit balance of them for many current opioid recipients. 

The FDA and manufacturers are also pursuing so-called ‘‘abuse deterrent formulations’’ to reduce the chance a particular product will be misused. These formulations 

should also be regarded with caution. While these re-engineered medicines are designed to thwart abuse, their active products are no less addictive, and most individuals who abuse or are addicted to opioids swallow them whole. Moreover, our research suggests that prescribers may have important misconceptions regarding their 

safety. In short, I am not convinced that we can engineer our way out of this 

problem. 

Some have framed efforts to reign in runaway prescribing as a threat to quality 

of care for those with chronic pain. As a practicing physician, I can assure you, nothing could be further from the truth. An overwhelming amount of evidence supports 

the compatibility of effective pain treatment with reducing opioid prescribing. High 

quality care for patients in pain isn’t jeopardized by such efforts, it demands it. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I look forward to your questions. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Thank you, Doctor. 

Dr. Forster. 

STATEMENT OF CAROL FORSTER, M.D., PHYSICIAN DIRECTOR, 

PHARMACY & THERAPEUTICS/MEDICATION SAFETY, MIDATLANTIC PERMANENTE MEDICAL GROUP, KAISER 

PERMANENTE 

Dr. FORSTER. Good morning, Mr. Chairman. I should say Ranking Member Blumenthal and the Committee Members. Thank you 

for the invitation to be here today. I am Dr. Carol Forster, Physician Director of Pharmacy and Therapeutics and Medication Safety 

44 

for the Mid-Atlantic Permanente Medical Group, one of the regions 

of Kaiser Permanente which is a national health program. 

It is the largest private integrated health care program in the 

United States, a private integrated health care program, I should 

say, providing comprehensive care to over 9.5 million members in 

eight States and the District of Columbia. We have over 500 pharmacies, 38 hospitals, and more than 170,000 employees, and we 

partner with over 17,000 physicians. 

Our health care organization has been focusing on improving 

overall pain management services and appropriate prescribing for 

several years. The impact of narcotic abuse and over-use is felt by 

every sector of health care in every community. Our integrated 

electronic medical record and targeted prescribing reports have allowed us to identify potential non-medical use of prescription narcotics, even in those with a history of a chronic pain condition. 

I would like to tell a story of a patient named Robert. Robert was 

diagnosed with a spinal injury after a motor vehicle accident in 

2012. Since that time, he has been referred to several specialists 

and has received treatment, including surgery on his spine. 

During the post-op period, Robert was soon identified as possibly 

depressed and drug-seeking. He had requested more medication 

and in higher doses from his surgeon as well as several other emergency room physicians. Subsequent involvement of his primary 

care physician and pain management team, as well as review of 

pharmacy reports, led to identifying that Robert was actually visiting ERs and multiple providers every week, many outside of Kaiser Permanente, and was not being truthful about his reasons for 

requested medications. 

He was quickly referred to our specialist in behavioral health 

and addictionology and weaned off of all narcotics safely and received counseling and continued treatment for his depression and 

his chronic pain conditions. 

National statistics showing the direct relationship between increasing deaths from narcotic overdose and increasing sales of narcotics in the U.S. have helped to motivate Kaiser Permanente to 

develop a national narcotic drug use initiative and aggressive monitoring program. 

First, we have supported, developed, and communicated comprehensive continuing education programs for our physicians on 

the subjects of pain management, appropriate opioid prescribing, 

narcotic abuse, and diversion. As our physicians develop a comprehensive treatment plan for patients with chronic pain, they 

focus initially on alternatives to opioid therapy. 

If they do prescribe opioids, it is recommended that a narcotic 

agreement between patient and doctor is used which clearly defines 

goals and conditions of therapy. They will then reassess the patient 

periodically for effectiveness, adverse affects, and other risk behaviors. If there is evidence of narcotic ineffectiveness or any concerns 

of misuse, an exit strategy is developed to effectively and safely 

wean the patient from the drug. Clear and understandable patient 

education from the beginning as far as expectations of treatment 

is essential. 

Second, using our integrated delivery approach and electronic 

medical record system that provides clinical decision support, we 

45 

generate reports on individual physician prescribers patterns and 

compare them to others in the same specialty. 

When physicians and pharmacists understand the bigger picture 

that good data can provide, prescribing behavior often does change. 

We also have started to look at groups of datasets known as drugseeking behavior reports that we believe have potential to identify 

patients at risk using various datasets such as those filling prescriptions at multiple pharmacies, those having multiple prescribers, those using high doses, and those having infrequent inperson visits with their physician. 

Third, we avail ourselves of outside resources, especially those of 

the State prescription drug monitoring programs, that allow us to 

share data and know when Kaiser Permanente patients seek prescriptions outside of our system. Our involvement also allows us to 

be part of the larger community in response to problems of overuse and abuse. 

Fourth, our entire 75-year history at Kaiser Permanente is one 

of physician leadership and group problem-solving. Our regions 

have developed multi-specialty chronic pain boards to review difficult and complex cases and offer recommendations to individual 

physicians. Local Kaiser Permanente physicians and pharmacists 

have also organized interdisciplinary work groups to address systematic problems of opioid use and to improve care. 

Thank you for inviting me to testify before the Committee today. 

I hope this information will be helpful as you understand and address narcotic use and over-use in VA hospitals and the communities they serve. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Forster follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CAROL A. FORSTER, M.D., PHYSICIAN DIRECTOR, PHARMACY & THERAPEUTICS/MEDICATION SAFETY, MID-ATLANTIC PERMANENTE MEDICAL GROUP, KAISER PERMANENTE MEDICAL CARE PROGRAM

Thank you for the invitation to be here today; it is an honor to be able to share 

our experiences with you. I am Dr. Carol Forster, Physician Director of Pharmacy 

and Therapeutics and Medication Safety for the Mid-Atlantic Permanente Medical 

Group at Kaiser Permanente. I received a pharmacy degree from Saint John’s University College of Pharmacy in New York and a medical degree from the State University of New York School of Medicine at Buffalo. I also have received training as 

a Patient Safety Officer at the Institute for Healthcare Improvement. I have used 

my background in pharmacy and medication safety to develop and augment several 

programs within Kaiser Permanente related to improving the appropriate prescribing of narcotics. 

I am testifying today from my perspective as a clinician and expert on medication 

safety and also on behalf of the national Kaiser Permanente Medical Care Program, 

the largest integrated healthcare delivery system in the United States, which provides comprehensive healthcare services to over 9.5 million members in eight states 

(California, Colorado, Georgia, Hawaii, Maryland, Oregon, Virginia and Washington) and the District of Columbia. 

We hope the information we share today about the programs Kaiser Permanente 

has established will provide additional resources to help the Committee further understand and address narcotic overuse and/or abuse in VA hospitals and the communities they serve. 

BACKGROUND: THE PROBLEM OF NARCOTIC OVERUSE/ABUSE

Controlled substance use has been subject to significant scrutiny in recent years, 

as the mortality from narcotic overdoses has increased proportionally to the sales 

46 

1http://www.cdc.gov/homeandrecreationalsafety/rxbrief/ 

2 80% of the world’s narcotic use for 5% of the world’s population 

3 Compared to 26 million individuals with diabetes, 16 million with coronary heart disease, 

and 12 million with cancer 4 Includes direct healthcare expenses and indirect costs, such as lost income and lost productivity 

of prescription narcotics.1 These types of statistics along with the disproportionately 

high volume of narcotic prescriptions in the United States,2 and other data showing 

worldwide increases in fraud, addiction, and abuse of narcotics motivated our organization to develop aggressive monitoring programs and mechanisms to assure that 

1) we are providing the most appropriate care to our patients with chronic pain; and 

2) we are doing whatever we can to reduce the likelihood of inappropriate narcotic 

use in our Program and in our communities. 

Narcotic medications are most often prescribed to treat chronic pain. According 

to a 2011 Institute of Medicine study, this condition is widespread, affecting 100 

million Americans.3 Forty-two percent have pain lasting over 1 year; 33% report 

their pain as disabling. Pain also drives utilization nationally, accounting for up to 

20% of outpatient visits and representing a $600 billion annual cost.4

KAISER PERMANENTE: OVERVIEW

Standard and established principles for appropriate opioid prescribing are used in 

all Kaiser Permanente regions. These include: appropriate patient selection, initial 

patient assessment, and development of a comprehensive treatment plan focusing 

initially on alternatives to opioid therapy when indicated. When opioid medication 

is prescribed, it is important to establish and document effectiveness upon reassessment, as well as identifying an exit strategy if therapy does not achieve pain reduction within a desired/expected period of time. Patient education during this process 

is critical to success. Physicians are encouraged to regularly assess the ‘‘Four A’s’’: 

analgesia, activity, adverse reactions, and aberrant behavior. 

Program-wide efforts to reduce the volume of patients taking high-dose narcotics 

for chronic non-cancer pain and to combat fraud, waste, and abuse of controlled substances have been instituted for the past several years. These efforts evolve appropriately to incorporate state and national laws and clinical guidelines and reflect 

our own best practices. Complex patients who are difficult to manage can usually 

be recognized early in the course of treatment, by exhibiting patterns that alert physicians to risks. When there are indications of drug-seeking behaviors, physicians 

can also seek additional consultation from internal Fraud, Waste, and Abuse Special 

Investigations Units if needed. 

Using our integrated health system we have been able to establish baseline data 

to understand our opportunities for improving narcotic use and set specific goals. 

One region set a goal to decrease the percentage of patients receiving chronic highdose chronic narcotic therapy (120mg or more morphine equivalent doses per day 

or MEDD) by 25%. Most recent data show a 29% reduction, mostly through providing improved feedback to physicians, using other non-pharmacologic pain therapies, and establishing a team of regional pain management experts. 

We set more overarching goals: to improve overall management of patients with 

chronic pain, to augment resources internally, and to refer chronic high utilizers to 

appropriate therapy in an effort to wean or discontinue narcotics due to lack of 

effect. 

We also widely communicated clear and concise protocols and established multiple 

education programs to ensure physicians and pharmacists were aware of the specific 

actions they should take when they suspect inappropriate prescription narcotic use. 

These protocols are consistent with existing pharmacy policies regarding controlled 

substance dispensing. Requests to refill too soon, multiple requests for more medication, missed appointments, multiple prescribers (internal and external to Kaiser 

Permanente), and multiple pharmacy locations are patterns and behaviors that alert 

our staff and physicians to investigate further before any drug orders are sent. Multiple continuing education programs are offered in all regions to refine and reinforce 

these actions expected of healthcare providers. 

As we work to address medication issues, we have been able to take advantage 

of our integrated delivery system to provide data and feedback to prescribers and 

to understand how patients with chronic pain are managed. Most pharmacy, diagnostic, and laboratory services delivered to Kaiser Permanente members are performed within Kaiser Permanente. We have also made a significant investment in 

developing a secure Electronic Health Record (EHR) system. The system includes 

functionality that helps to improve medication safety and reduce errors, such as 

automated clinical decision support for adverse drug event prevention, drug-allergy 

47 

5www.pdmpexcellence.org/sites/all/pdfs/Brandeis_PDMP_Report.pdf 

checking, and medication adherence monitoring. The EHR enables coordination 

across the care delivery spectrum, including primary care, inpatient and specialty 

care, pharmacy, laboratories, etc., providing opportunities to manage drug utilization, including being able to closely monitor narcotic use. 

Kaiser Permanente recognizes that several states have also established improved 

monitoring and methods to detect inappropriate prescribing. Arizona, Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, Kentucky, and Tennessee are among states that have 

instituted detailed mechanisms to provide feedback to prescribers, and on occasion 

law enforcement and/or licensing boards when state prescription drug monitoring 

program (PDMP) data reveal suspicious prescribing patterns.5 For example, prescribing large quantities/large volumes of opioids, prescribing unsafe combinations, 

and prescribing more frequently than expected by that medical specialty will prompt 

an investigation in states employing this type of monitoring. 

CLINICAL LEADERSHIP AND PHYSICIAN EDUCATION

Physician leaders and other clinicians in various Kaiser Permanente regions have 

formed local workgroups to address the complex problems related to narcotic prescribing for chronic pain. In the Mid-Atlantic region, a Chronic Pain Workgroup was 

convened in May 2012 as part of our overall strategy to address narcotic overuse in 

our local communities. This workgroup focused on developing a strategy to further 

enhance our efforts to assure appropriate prescribing and dispensing of controlled 

substances. Interdisciplinary experts came from Pharmacy Operations, Clinical 

Pharmacy, Pain Management, Adult Primary Care, Behavioral Health, the Regional 

Spine Service Behavioral Health, Surgical subspecialties, and Addictionology. 

The workgroup met frequently over a period of about six months to revise existing 

protocols and policies, create tools in our EHR related to appropriate care of chronic 

pain, and agree upon appropriate reporting to monitor use. The workgroup also revised goals for our continuing education programs for physicians and pharmacists. 

Many of our efforts focus on prescriber education and on supporting improved 

management of chronic pain treatment and non-pharmacologic pain therapies. We 

offer continuing medical education (CME) courses that cover pain management clinical guidelines as well as detection and prevention of abuse, diversion, and fraud. 

We have developed a comprehensive chronic pain order set with clinical references, 

appropriate doses for various medication orders, lab orders including urine drug 

testing, patient instruction sheets, narcotic agreements, and multi-specialty referral 

resources to improve narcotic prescribing and management at the point of care. 

CHRONIC PAIN BOARD

A number of Kaiser Permanente regions have established regional Chronic Pain 

Boards to review difficult and complex cases by referral as well as cases that meet 

criteria for review. Such Boards typically will have physicians from a number of related specialties, such as Pain Medicine, Interventional Pain, Anesthesia, 

Addictionology, Psychiatry, Clinical Pharmacy, Medication Safety, and potentially 

others including primary care providers (PCPs) and any specialists involved in cases 

under review. The Board review process includes discussion of each case, developing 

customized therapy goals, providing recommendations to the primary care provider, 

and documenting a plan for treatment. 

THE IMPORTANCE OF DATA

Reliable information is also critical to understand and manage narcotic pain medication and chronic pain treatment. Our Pharmacy Analytics Department is able to 

generate reports based on specific data elements and patient populations. For the 

last several years, our regions have established national and local prescribing reports to monitor appropriate use of opioids and controlled substances. Prescriber 

feedback reports give specific information regarding individual physician prescribing 

patterns, including quantities prescribed, average MEDD and how one physician’s 

prescribing might compare to another in the same specialty. 

We can sort by patient, provider, specialty, facility, and can see all filled prescriptions, including external pharmacies if paid for using the Kaiser Permanente drug 

benefit. There are also reports that focus on unsafe combinations of drugs used, for 

example, a ‘‘triad report’’ was created to detect when carisoprodol (a muscle relaxant), oxycodone or hydrocodone (a narcotic), and a benzodiazepine such as 

lorazepam (an anti-anxiety drug) have been prescribed concurrently for the same 

patient. 

48 

More recently, our Program has developed a ‘‘drug-seeking behavior’’ report for all 

regions. By using a group of selected data sets, we can calculate a score for patients 

that meet several criteria associated with such behaviors. Multiple pharmacies, multiple prescribers, high doses, infrequent in-person visits with their doctor, etc., are 

examples of some of the data elements used in scoring. We are also able to separately identify and report any patients who meet a set of specific criteria, for example: 4 or more prescriptions, 4 or more pharmacies, AND greater than 120mg MEDD 

in a 90-day period. We can also look at subgroups, such as Medicare patients. 

In most regions, we have required our prescribing physicians to register with 

their state prescription drug monitoring program (PDMP). Kaiser Permanente pharmacies provide the required controlled substance dispensing data to the state prescription monitoring programs. The PDMPs are invaluable as they allow us to see 

which patients fill external prescriptions even if they are not using their Kaiser 

Permanente drug benefit. These state programs along with our own internal reporting have enabled us to review in a comprehensive way all the controlled substances 

the patient may be receiving both inside and outside of the Kaiser Permanente 

facilities. 

Providing actionable data is the key to uncovering and addressing suspicious patterns of narcotic use. Feedback is given to physician leadership when indicated, with 

individual messaging to prescribers if their patients have been identified as highutilizers or suspected of drug seeking. 

CENTRALIZED INFORMATION RESOURCES

Making information available in one place is also important. We have established 

an online secure site to post important references for the Chronic Pain Workgroup 

as a single site resource, where documents and presentations, including those from 

other Kaiser Permanente regions and external sources are posted. These resources 

can be accessed by members of group and other interested parties. We are also developing a KP Program-wide Chronic Non-Cancer Pain web page, accessed through 

our National online Clinical Library, to contain resources for all healthcare 

providers. 

CONCLUSION

In summary, we continue to take specific steps, as we have described here today, 

to combat the increased problem of narcotic overuse and abuse in our communities. 

We are committed to aligning ourselves with other institutions that face problems 

of narcotic overuse and abuse. Our efforts to date that have helped us achieve reductions in use include: 

• Implementing recognized, well-established national, state and local principles 

and clinical guidelines throughout our program; 

• Engaging our prescribers in PDMP registration in their states; 

• Maintaining a continued focus on education and awareness for pharmacists and 

physicians; 

• Supporting clinical leadership and community engagement in addressing problems of narcotic overuse; 

• Monitoring targeted prescribing and drug-seeking behavior reports, based on 

pharmacy analytic data and our EHR system; and, 

• Establishing expert consultative Chronic Pain Boards for review of difficult 

cases and making referrals to recommended subspecialists when necessary to improve the care of the patient. 

Through these internal programs, we have achieved improvements in managing 

narcotic prescribing and limiting the use of unsafe combinations of medications. We 

will continue to work closely with our local, state, and national organizations as we 

strive to decrease the morbidity and mortality associated with narcotic overuse and 

abuse in the U.S. 

Thank you to the Committee for the opportunity to provide this testimony. I 

would be happy to respond to questions. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Thanks, Dr. Forster. 

Mr. Gadea. 

49 

STATEMENT OF JOHN GADEA, DIRECTOR, DRUG CONTROL DIVISION, CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER 

PROTECTION 

Mr. GADEA. Good morning, Ranking Member Blumenthal, Senator Baldwin. My name is John Gadea. I am the Director of State 

Drug Control. I am also a pharmacist. For you who do not know 

what we do, we monitor the entire pharmaceutical industry from 

manufacturer to the patient. We do that through various compliance inspections, and when something goes away from that route, 

we also investigate it. 

We have been doing that for over 40 years. I personally have 

been involved in it for over 30. In addition to that responsibility, 

the Division is also home to the Connecticut Prescription Monitoring program, the Connecticut Medical Marijuana program, and 

we are also home to the board administrator for the Commission 

of Pharmacy. 

We are going to primarily focus in on the Prescription Monitoring 

program. With the backing and help of, at the time, Attorney General Blumenthal, and the Commissioner at the time, we went live 

in July 2008 with our Prescription Monitoring program and we require all pharmacies and hospital outpatient pharmacies to be 

uploading data into the system. 

We gave them between 3 and 4 months to have their system in 

order to be able to upload that data. We followed a sequence of access. The access was primarily, and first, given to physicians to access the system, followed by pharmacists and eventually followed 

by law enforcement. This was in keeping with the program’s goal 

of having the actual Prescription Monitoring program be, first and 

foremost, a health care tool, and we wanted them to have that 

access. 

The third major group is law enforcement as well as the folks in 

my unit and they came on board substantially sometime further 

down the road. 

I would like to underscore that fact, that physicians and prescribers are key to it, and that is that the system is there to provide better health care, and in order to provide that better health 

care, you have patients that, unfortunately, as part of their treatment, have to receive certain regimens that include controlled 

substances. 

What happens is, what we started learning is that various 

groups on both sides of the issue identify that because you have a 

large quantity of drugs, you are a drug abuser. What we found is 

that you are not really a drug abuser, most of the time. You are 

a drug misuser and you have been placed in a situation that, either 

between your own actions as a patient or because of problems in 

drug management or health care management, you now have this 

problem. 

I would also point out that working with addictionologists in the 

course of our investigations that many times that is the symptom 

of the problem and not so much the problem in and of itself. After 

hearing this issue discussed today and in other times where this 

issue has come up, not just with the VA, but with any health care 

system we must ask of the problem we are talking about is the addiction of the patient or is the prescribing of those products the 

50 

symptom of a greater issue that is not really going to be addressed? 

If it is not addressed, all the efforts you put into correcting what 

you are going to try and correct may not really give us a solution 

that we want. 

We find that the program works best when it is tied to a robust 

educational program and we have done several things to increase 

that usage of the program through education. We recently included 

morphine milli-equivalents on our program reports that give a good 

benchmark to physicians based on Substance Abuse and Mental 

Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) data, whether they are 

approaching the high end of prescribing. 

The problem in Connecticut is that we have a VA that does not 

upload data into our system. It provides relatively a Swiss cheese 

approach to data. It does not help anybody. We have tried having 

these discussions at the request of physicians in the VA system, 

and at one point, we went down to speak to those physicians and 

were told by the privacy officer, who is no longer there, to never 

discuss that with their physicians, leave the premises immediately 

and do not return. 

Since then, physicians have been given access to the system, 

which is very, very, good. But currently, we do not have their data 

being uploaded and that presents a problem because we are a 

small State and sometimes patients from the VA wind up in emergency rooms or getting health care outside of there and it is not 

beneficial to, at that point, look up a patient that you are trying 

to take care of and you do not know the complete picture. 

I have submitted written testimony. I would like to thank you for 

the time to present this information and I look forward to answering any of your questions or comments. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Gadea follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JOHN GADEA, JR., DIRECTOR OF STATE DRUG CONTROL

DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER PROTECTION, STATE OF CONNECTICUT

I am John Gadea, Jr., RPh, Director of State Drug Control Division, Department 

of Consumer Protection for the State of Connecticut. I am honored to appear before 

this Committee. 

The Drug Control Division oversees the entire pharmaceutical industry from manufacturer to patient and includes wholesalers, pharmacies, prescribers, dispensers 

and any location where drugs may be purchased, dispensed or stored. This involves 

performing compliance inspections. The Division also investigates the loss and diversion of all drugs, including controlled substances from the state’s registrants and 

healthcare professionals. This is all accomplished with 12 agents, all of whom are 

pharmacists, and two of whom are supervisors. 

In addition to the described responsibilities, the Division also is home to the Connecticut Prescription Monitoring Program, the Connecticut Medical Marijuana Program, and the Board Administrator to the Commission of Pharmacy. 

The Connecticut Prescription Monitoring Program, also known as the Connecticut 

Prescription Monitoring and Reporting System (CPMRS), went live on July 1, 2008. 

Shortly after going live, pharmacies and hospital outpatient pharmacies began 

uploading data into the system. All these entities were afforded three months to 

modify their systems to be able to upload their controlled substance data into the 

CPMRS. 

Soon after the upload process was completed by the pharmacies, access was afforded to prescribers, pharmacists and law enforcement under certain conditions. 

We followed the sequence of authorized access to the system by allowing prescribers 

access to the system first, followed by pharmacists. This was in keeping with the 

program’s goal of providing better care to patients by enabling health care professionals to have access to their patients’ controlled substance history. Law enforcement was the last of the major user groups to be given access to the system. 

51 

I would like to underscore that first and foremost this system can attain the most 

by encouraging the prescribers and pharmacists to use the system to provide better 

healthcare to their patients. Many patients being treated for a condition may, as 

part of the treatment, use controlled substances. Some patient profiles may display 

large quantities of medications or the use of several different prescribers or pharmacies; that alone may appear to be indicative of some type of fraudulent activity. 

Often, we find that these patients are categorized as drug abusers when, in reality 

they are misusers of the medications. Their misuse is either a result of their own 

actions or that of the prescribers, through lack of proper medication management 

or lack of total healthcare management. 

The end result of this increase in the pool of ‘drug abusers’ is that it creates an 

increased workload on law enforcement and strains the criminal justice system, 

when in fact, many of these cases could have been handled as a healthcare event. 

Law enforcement should not have to use their valuable resources to manage the result of poor healthcare. 

We believe the Connecticut Prescription Monitoring Program is at its best when 

combined with a robust education program. The education is directed at prescribers 

and pharmacists on the use of the system; and on prescribers, pharmacists and the 

public on prescription drug abuse. Collaborations with associations such as the Connecticut Medical Society and the Connecticut Pharmacists Association are critical to 

the program’s educational completeness. 

Knowing the type of disastrous situations that can arise from prescription drug 

abuse and misuse we believe that it is critical for the prescribers and pharmacists 

to have accurate, timely and complete information at their disposal that allows them 

to make those needed decisions affecting their patients’ well-being. This is what we 

try to achieve with the CPMRS. There are times though, when we are not able to 

provide this program in the form that we believe it should be. 

The problem of not providing a complete data set to both prescribers and pharmacists on their patients can be illustrated by the lack of data being uploaded into 

the CPMRS by the U.S. Veterans Administration (‘‘VA’’). The VA out-patient pharmacies and the VA mail-order pharmacies perform a valuable function in the care 

of our veterans. While a number of veterans receive the bulk of their healthcare 

from within the VA, many of these same veterans have physicians both in the VA 

system and in their communities. They also have some prescriptions dispensed from 

their local pharmacies. Only recently have the prescribers in the VA been allowed 

to access the CPMRS and, while this is a desirable situation, it is incomplete because it does not contain the uploaded controlled substance information from within 

the VA Healthcare system. That VA system prescription information would be extremely beneficial to the community prescribers and pharmacists. It should be further noted that any admittance to a non-VA hospital or emergency room without 

this information being included in the patient’s controlled substance history could 

be detrimental to the health of the veteran. 

In the past, physicians in the VA Healthcare system have resorted to gaining access to the CPMRS by using their own computers or performing the patient reviews 

from an off campus location. Being invited on to the VA campus to explain the 

CPMRS resulted in the program manager and me being instructed to leave the campus, not to discuss our system with VA practitioners and not to return. Although 

Federal law was eventually changed allowing VA Healthcare system prescribers to 

access the system, it was not until in 2013 that we received a call from the VA in 

Connecticut indicating that practitioners were allowed to register in the CPMRS 

and the VA Central Office in Washington, DC, would perform the uploading of data. 

As of today, no uploads into the CPMRS have occurred. It is of great concern that 

the state of Connecticut can access the data from 17 other states in addition to the 

684 in-state and 872 out-of-state pharmacies but it cannot access the data from two 

campuses located within the boundaries of the state. 

To this point in this testimony I have described the system as a healthcare tool 

for both prescribers and pharmacists, but there are those individuals who go beyond 

what healthcare care providers can correct or control and it becomes a law enforcement matter. The CPMRS is a valuable tool for certain members of local, state and 

Federal law enforcement that have been specifically authorized by my agency to use 

the system. Many of the comments regarding prescription-monitoring programs 

revolve around the detection of ‘‘doctor shopping.’’ While this is a major problem, 

doctor shopping is only one form of diversion. Forgeries and false call-ins of controlled substance prescriptions can only be detected by the prescriber who supposedly prescribed the drugs; therefore we encourage prescribers to review their 

own prescribing history using this system. Prescription monitoring programs also 

offer an invaluable tool in the detection of economic fraud committed by prescribers, 

pharmacist, pharmacies and patients. As a result, agencies such as the Connecticut 

52 

Department of Social Services and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services have recouped fraudulent claims. Additionally, my agency along with the Connecticut Department of Public Health and the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration have just completed a case against a midlevel practitioner that has resulted in 

the surrender of Federal and state controlled substance registrations. The same 

practitioner was recently identified as one of the top ten prescribers of controlled 

substances in the country. Other agencies utilizing the system include the FBI, the 

Office of the Connecticut Chief State’s Attorney, the Connecticut State Police, and 

numerous local police departments. 

Thank you for providing me this opportunity to present this information to you. 

I would be happy to respond to any questions you have today. 

Following that, please feel free to contact me or Commissioner Jonathan Harris 

if you have any additional questions or comments. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Thanks, Mr. Gadea. Before I turn the 

gavel back to Senator Isakson, let me just say all of your written 

testimony, if you wish, will be made a part of the record without 

objection. Senator Isakson. 

Chairman ISAKSON. In order for Senator Isakson to get re-organized, I am going to leave the gavel with you for just a minute, sir, 

for your questions first. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Thank you. Mr. Gadea, let me begin by 

asking you about the real life consequences of the Swiss cheese, as 

you have aptly described it, and I described it in the same way earlier, in terms of the gaps between the State Prescription Monitoring program and the Federal VA system for tracking and monitoring prescriptions. 

You mentioned the potential emergency room visit where the 

emergency room doctor would have no knowledge about what the 

prescriptions were from VA doctors. There are also law enforcement consequences, are there not? 

Mr. GADEA. Yes. Law enforcement has access to our system for 

specific cases. They have to have an open case number. Because we 

are a small State and there are a lot of patients that are outpatients in the VA system, they are in the community and they are 

receiving products, medications from both inside the VA and outside the VA. 

They are filling those prescriptions in pharmacies. Pharmacies 

are the first trip wire to identify that something is not right. It becomes extremely difficult if that trip wire has been cut, in this 

case, and that dovetails into the first thing that the pharmacy will 

do is contact local narcotics division, Statewide narcotics, and they 

are at a loss because you then have to go and search manually. 

We have 684 pharmacies in the State. It becomes very difficult, 

even by phone call, to do that search. It is not very efficient to have 

a system which is only being fed partially. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. As I know because I was Attorney General 

and did a number of these cases. There have been both civil and 

criminal prosecutions resulting from the excellent work done by 

your program. 

Mr. GADEA. The Department of Social Services combined with 

the U.S. Health and Human Services, use the system to recoup 

fraudulent claims. We work closely with the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration and the compliance folks. And we recently 

had a case where we used this system to identify someone, conduct 

a case, and we have just received the surrender of their controlled 

substance registration, both at the State and Federal level. 

53 

That case was rather important because they were also identified 

on Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) listing as 

one of the top ten prescribers in the country. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Uploading this information from the VA to 

the State system, in other words, complete connectivity would aid 

not only better treatment, but also law enforcement that would 

save taxpayer dollars? 

Mr. GADEA. Oh, absolutely. Even at the health care level, we can 

currently share data with 17 other States. We have uploads of data 

from approximately 800 out of State pharmacy providers and over 

600 in-state pharmacy providers. We do not have the Newington 

VA and we do not have the West Haven VA able to complete the 

picture. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Dr. Alexander, there was a question earlier, and I think you were here, about possible alternative ways of 

treating pain. Could you comment on the potential alternatives for 

treating Post Traumatic Stress and pain associated with it or other 

means of alternative treatments for pain that might be as effective 

or more so and far less dangerous in terms of the potential side effects of addiction and dependence? 

Dr. ALEXANDER. Thank you for the question. There are lots of different treatments for both post-traumatic stress disorder as well as 

pain, and these treatments include both pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic approaches. Unfortunately, at times prescribers over 

rely on prescription drugs and underutilize non-pharmacologic approaches that, in the case of pain, may include physical therapy, 

massage, biofeedback and acupuncture. 

To some degree the optimal approach depends upon the type of 

pain, since different treatments work variously well for different 

types of pain. There was a comment earlier regarding, for example, 

the difference between visceral and non-visceral pain. I think that 

these are important to keep in mind and these alternative approaches tend to be under-used. 

It is also important to note that we have less information than 

we would like about the long-term safety and effectiveness of some 

of the pharmacologic treatments and alternatives to opioids. But 

given the well-demonstrated serious adverse events associated with 

opioids, I think that overall, their risk/benefit balance is unfavorable for many, many current users. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Thank you. Unfortunately, my time has 

expired and since Senator Isakson is here and since he is the 

Chairman, I am going to yield to him and just say I have many 

more questions. I am going to submit them. I apologize, Dr. 

Forster, that I did not get to my questions for you. I have other 

questions for the additional witnesses. 

This panel is extraordinarily useful and expert and I really want 

to thank you for being here today. We are just kind of denting the 

surface of the immense resource in terms of knowledge that you 

have to help us, and I really am very grateful to you for being here 

and your continuing help to the Committee. Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman ISAKSON. Thank you, Senator Blumenthal, and I appreciate very much the panelists being here and apologize that I 

had to go to the floor to present an amendment. That was part of 

the process I could not avoid today. 

54 

Maybe I will cover Dr. Forster’s question that you had anyway, 

because in reading the testimony, one of your regions at KaiserPermanente realized a 29 percent reduction in the prescription of 

opioids, and in your remarks, you pay credit to that. You say this 

was primarily a result of improved feedback to physicians. What 

does your feedback system entail and how are providers kept accountable, held accountable should they be over-prescribing opiates 

at a much higher rate than normal? 

Dr. FORSTER. Thank you for the question. I actually will correct 

that. We just got our newest report yesterday and it is now 33 

percent. 

Chairman ISAKSON. It is the right direction. 

Dr. FORSTER. Thank you for asking. This region specifically is actually the Mid-Atlantic region, which is my region. What we do 

have is, I think, a really amazing level of reporting regarding narcotic use. We have been using it since the end of 2011. 

I helped work on getting it to the right level of reporting that 

would be useful to a physician and actionable to a physician so we 

are able to see, you have already mentioned, the morphine equivalent doses per day which is very important as far as severity or 

risk severity as well as the amount of drug they are taking across 

all different types of drugs. 

We have MEDs on our report. We also have the days supply that 

is being given. We have, of course, the physician, the prescriber, 

and who the primary physician is. We have also done combination 

reports. We call it a ‘‘triad report.’’ We look at the combinations of 

benzodiazepines, narcotics, and Carisoprodol which is a muscle relaxant that on the street is actually part of the ‘‘trinity’’ or ‘‘holy 

trinity,’’ as it is called, used to achieve the best ‘‘high.’’ 

These kinds of combinations are very important for us to know 

about and our physicians may not be aware that there is concurrent prescribing. Of course, now more physicians are using the Prescription Monitoring Program (PMP) as another aspect of the report that is tied into the prescriber feedback. 

We also have a new report which is almost a year old now, and 

that is a drug-seeking behavior report. It is not meant to put any 

blame on the patient, but it is meant to identify behaviors that 

seem to be or have a potential to be drug seeking. 

It shows us that, for instance, a patient may not have had a visit 

with their provider for many months, as well as have had multiple 

providers prescribe a narcotic or have had visited multiple pharmacies, both inside and outside of Kaiser, to get that prescription. 

Those are hallmarks or red flags to us that there is a problem. 

These types of reports are—I mean, I can go into much more detail about it, but it would take a long time. I have presentations 

on these types of reports. We really feel that they really have 

helped all of us, the pharmacists, the physicians, and even our patients understand that appropriate monitoring is the best way to 

really take care of the patient. 

I think it has already been mentioned before, our physicians are 

also receiving a lot of education as well. In addition to receiving 

those reports, they are receiving much education on appropriate 

prescribing. You cannot give just a report. You need to educate as 

well. 

55 

From the very beginning, we have been adding education along 

with giving that report and have initiated mandatory training, and 

mandatory registration for the state PMPs. I think all States except one, I believe, now have PMPs in place. I think D.C. is about 

to start theirs at the end of this year. So pretty soon we will be 

able, in all of our regions, we will be able to have PMP access for 

everyone. 

Chairman ISAKSON. If, by virtue of the information you are collecting, you find one of your providers prescribing at a much higher 

rate than others, what do you do to hold them accountable? 

Dr. FORSTER. Well, that is one of my roles. I work with that physician and their chief of service or their leader in their local facility 

and give them the data they need to show that there has been variant prescribing and we try to take action along with them, help 

them identify resources for the patient. 

Part of the electronic medical record we use has what they call 

‘‘smartsets’’ which provide decision support at the point of care. We 

encourage the physicians to understand all the resources that are 

available for treating pain, and that includes the many referrals 

that we have already mentioned on the panel, the various lab tests, 

and other resources that we can use other than drug treatment to 

take care of that patient. 

We make sure that that physician understands the concerns so 

that he can start the weaning process. One of those referrals, of 

course, is also to pain management. We have pain management 

specialists. 

Chairman ISAKSON. Let me ask you a question. Is hydrocodone 

an opiate? 

Dr. FORSTER. Yes. 

Chairman ISAKSON. The reason I ask that question is, more information—information is power and that is what you are really 

talking about and the better the information you have, the better 

tracking. I had back surgery in October and was prescribed 

hydrocodone for, I guess for pain or whatever, and it worked. 

Dr. FORSTER. They can work. 

Chairman ISAKSON. I did not work after taking it. My point I 

want to get to and I do not want to take any more time is, the 

pharmacy that I filled that prescription at, when my prescription 

time had run out, I got a letter from them telling me that my prescription could not be renewed and that if I had any leftover 

hydrocodone pills, they would be happy to destroy them for me, 

which I was very impressed with, because I think a lot of that stuff 

is getting into the secondary market or the black market or the kid 

market. 

Dr. FORSTER. Yes. 

Chairman ISAKSON. I think the more information you have and 

the more awareness you have, the better results you are going to 

have. 

Dr. FORSTER. I totally support that. 

Chairman ISAKSON. Thank you for what you are doing. 

Dr. FORSTER. Thank you. 

Chairman ISAKSON. Senator Baldwin. 

Senator BALDWIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Dr. Alexander and 

Dr. Forster, in your testimony, you both highlight a focus on avoidVerDate Mar 15 2010 12:35 Jun 14, 2016 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 Z:\ACTIVE\032615.TXT PAULIN
56 

ing the unsafe combination of opioids with medicines such as 

benzodiazepines, and also focus on, Dr. Alexander in particular, 

when you are treating patients with co-morbid conditions such as 

mood disorders, Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, Traumatic Brain 

Injury, and substance abuse, these are both issues that were very 

apparent when we started learning of problems at the Tomah VA 

facility. That sort of dangerous combination had tragic results at 

that facility. 

It also motivated me to work with this Committee to ensure 

strong report language with regard to a bill, and I do want to give 

the Chairman and Ranking Member a big shout out and thank you 

for all of your work on the Clay Hunt SAV Act, a suicide prevention act that was passed by Congress and signed into law last 

month. 

I thank the Chairman and Ranking Member for working with me 

to include report language that requires that the third party evaluation of VA mental health and suicide prevention programs that 

are required by the Clay Hunt SAV Act includes a review of opioid 

use by patients in those programs. 

I do, Mr. Chairman, want to submit for the record a letter from 

the National Alliance on Mental Illness, also known as NAMI, in 

support of including opioid prescribing practices in the Clay Hunt 

third party evaluation. 

[The letter referred to is in the Appendix.] 

Senator BALDWIN. Dr. Alexander, please talk a little bit more 

about why these combinations of opioids and benzodiazepines and 

other strong prescription drugs are so dangerous, and also, with regard to the treatment of patients not with, necessarily, chronic 

pain, but with mental illness or PTSD. 

Dr. ALEXANDER. Sure. Thank you for the question. As you have 

identified, these are particularly high risk patients and I think it 

is really important that they are prospectively identified and carefully managed throughout the continuum of their care. Multi-disciplinary teams, which ideally would be involved in the management of virtually every patient that is on opioid therapy for chronic 

pain, are particularly important for these types of patients, as are 

especially vigilant efforts to decrease opioid use among them. 

Some of the medicines that we are talking about are considered 

psychotropic drugs. They have specific targeted effects on the central nervous system. Benzodiazepines, for example, have effects not 

dissimilar from alcohol within the brain, and they can compound 

or act synergistically with opioids and increase the magnitude of 

adverse effects from opioids, ranging from sedation and impaired 

cognition to respiratory depression and death. 

So, although many risk factors for high risk prescribing have 

been identified, the presence of these co-morbid conditions, I think, 

is of particular concern and warrants particular focus. 

Senator BALDWIN. Dr. Forster, the same question. 

Dr. FORSTER. Yes. The combination is definitely unsafe and, as 

I mentioned, there is also a combination using Carisoprodol which 

is a muscle relaxant and that actually adds to this euphoria that 

a person who is misusing narcotics may seek. We are trying our 

best to not use narcotics in patients with co-morbid conditions 

57 

knowing the potential is there, and there is a concern that they are 

a relatively high risk population. 

In cases where a short-term narcotic is needed, they have to be 

watched very closely. Again, as I mentioned, we have addiction 

medicine specialists, behavioral health specialists, and pain management specialists that are there for us. As a primary care physician myself, I would probably, if I had a patient that was a difficult 

or more complex patient with multiple co-morbidities, I probably 

would seek their advice and recommendation much earlier than 

later, in fact, almost at the outset. 

Senator BALDWIN. Thank you. 

Chairman ISAKSON. Thank you, Senator Baldwin. 

Senator Blumenthal has one additional question. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Yes. I want to ask Mr. Gadea about 

sources of funding for the Prescription Monitoring program. Can 

you tell us how Connecticut system is funded and whether that 

same system or source of funding is used for other PMPs in the 49 

States that have them around the country, if you know? 

Mr. GADEA. It is a little haphazard around the country. I can tell 

you what we have done. We initially had implementation grants 

and execution grants from the Bureau of Justice Assistance. Those 

grants eventually, as more States came on, became more difficult 

to obtain. We were very fortunate in having your office as part of 

restitution to the State would provide us with funding to keep us 

afloat. 

We have been able to do that since the onset and have never 

used, to this date, any funding from the State, general funds. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Just for the record, your reference to my 

office was to the Office—— 

Mr. GADEA. The Attorney General. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL [continuing]. Of Attorney General in the 

settlement that was done with Perdue Farmer in the case that we 

did jointly with the U.S. Department of Justice. 

Mr. GADEA. Yes. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Just so that is clear in the record. To state 

it succinctly, you receive no Federal or State funds for the operation of your office? 

Mr. GADEA. No. At this point we do have in the proposed budget 

that one more position—we currently operate the entire system 

with just one person and we are hopeful that if the budget passes 

in the format that we like, that we do get funding for that, for the 

program, the maintenance, as well as one more individual. Around 

the country, it is some grants, some funding, partial funding. It is 

kind of all over the place. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. To again try to state it succinctly, for systems that are critically and profoundly important to law enforcement, for effective treatment for addition abuse prevention, the system right now is, at best, haphazard—— 

Mr. GADEA. Yes. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL [continuing]. Funding? 

Mr. GADEA. Yes. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. My view is that fact ought to be changed. 

So thank you for your testimony—— 

Mr. GADEA. Thank you. 

58 

1https://nccih.nih.gov/news/press/02102015mb 

2 Chronic pain is a common problem among active-duty military personnel and veterans. 

NCCIH, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, and other agencies are sponsoring research 

to see whether integrative approaches can help. For example, NCCIH-funded studies are testing 

the effects of adding mindfulness meditation, self-hypnosis, or other complementary approaches 

to pain management programs for veterans. https://nccih.nih.gov/health/integrative-health 

Senator BLUMENTHAL [continuing]. Mr. Gadea, Dr. Forster, Dr. 

Alexander. 

Chairman ISAKSON. I want to thank our witnesses for their participation today and their leadership. Thanks, Senator Baldwin, for 

being here, Senator Johnson for making time. The record will be 

left open for 5 days for additional questions to be submitted or 

opening statements or closing statements to be made. If there is no 

other business to come before the Committee, we stand adjourned. 

RESPONSE TO POSTHEARING QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. TAMMY BALDWIN TO

CAROL FORSTER, M.D., PHYSICIAN DIRECTOR, PHARMACY & THERAPEUTICS/MEDICATION SAFETY, MID-ATLANTIC PERMANENTE MEDICAL GROUP, KAISER PERMANENTE

ALTERNATIVE TREATMENTS FOR CHRONIC PAIN

VHA is trying to expand the use of complementary and alternative medicine to 

treat patients with chronic pain, recognizing that there’s growing evidence of the effectiveness of these approaches. Furthermore, when I speak with veterans, I consistently hear a desire for more acupuncture, massage, yoga, aqua-therapy, and other 

techniques. I would like to see VA more rapidly expand the use of these techniques. 

• What types of alternative and complementary approaches are used by Kaiser 

specifically, and private health providers generally? 

Response. Recent research findings indicate growth in Americans’ use of complementary and alternative practices for a variety of health conditions, including 

pain.1 The goal of integrating these practices is to improve functioning and reduce 

the need for pain medicines that can have serious side effects.2

KP offers its members certain complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) 

therapies. The most consistently available, program-wide, is mindfulness training 

(e.g., biofeedback, meditation, guided imagery). We also offer some movement-based 

CAM interventions (e.g., Feldenkrais, Tai Chi) through Health Education departments as health promotion activities at a cost for members outside of the traditional 

healthcare benefit. Other treatments, like acupuncture, may be available to some 

patients as a covered service, depending on an individual’s plan benefits. 

Kaiser Permanente employs CAM specialists to manage various conditions, including pain. CAM can encompass a very broad spectrum of different therapies and 

techniques, from health education resources to alternative treatments, such as acupuncture, chiropractic or osteopathic treatment. Some CAM approaches fall outside 

the typical services offered or covered by health care systems, for instance, herbal 

remedies, exercise or movement therapies (e.g., yoga) or massage; some approaches, 

like lifestyle changes, depend primarily on self-motivation and individual action, 

rather than external interventions. 

The uptake for CAM therapies across the overall population of chronic pain patients may vary. There can be several barriers to CAM adoption for pain management, including the timing of CAM (i.e. whether CAM is offered as initial therapy) 

and the investment and commitment required of patients and providers. For the 

right patients, CAM may be a beneficial component of pain management. 

The ability to aggregate and analyze electronic clinical data can allow providers 

to flag certain prescribing/utilization patterns. Applying these analytics successfully 

is enhanced within integrated care delivery systems, like KP and the VA, where it 

is possible to coordinate care across care settings (both in- and out-patient primary 

and specialty care and pharmacy). 

Within KP, we have used this approach for managing members who are receiving 

long-term opioids, applying population care strategies. While we have tried to target 

these members to the CAM modalities, the pharmacy analytics approach was more 

successful: in promoting ‘‘universal precautions’’ such as: tracking early refills, 

emergency room/urgent care dispensed medications, annual urine toxicology 

screenings, documented medication agreements, etc. 

• How would you rate their effectiveness? 

59 

3See http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23126534; see also http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ 

books/NBK83795/; see also www.va.gov/RAC-GWVI/docs/Minutes_and_Agendas/Presentations 

_Feb2011 

Response. While the evidence of CAM’s safety and effectiveness in chronic pain 

management is not overwhelming, certain modalities may help patients motivated 

to integrate CAM into their treatment plan. One of the challenges to determining 

clinical effectiveness is that the goals of CAM therapies focus on feelings of wellbeing and mastery of the illness, outcomes that are harder to define and measure 

than objective primary endpoints typical to research involving traditional medicine.3

[Whereupon, at 12:04 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

(61) 

1 CDC: NCHS Health E-Stat: Trends in Drug-poisoning Deaths Involving Opioid Analgesics 

and Heroin: United States, 1999—2012. Margaret Warner, Ph.D., Division of Vital Statistics; 

and Holly Hedegaard, M.D., M.S.P.H., and Li-Hui Chen, M.S., Ph.D., Office of Analysis and Epidemiology 

A P P E N D I X 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF LOUISE R. VAN DIEPEN, MS, CGP, FASHP 

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee: Thank you for this opportunity to 

testify today on United States (US) data and strategies on opioid overprescribing to 

put into context VA opioid prescription policy, practice and procedures. I am a retired Veterans Health Administration (VHA) executive and clinical pharmacist who 

served in a number of Federal and private sector health care executive and clinical 

roles, most in direct support of high quality health care for Veterans (e.g., VHA National Chief of Clinical Pharmacy/Quality Management; Director of Clinical [Pharmacy] Services, PharmMark Corporation; Vice President for Clinical [Pharmacy] 

Services for AARP Pharmacy Services; VHA Chief of Staff). 

I will frame my testimony around six questions to ensure that Committee has 

adequate context for its discussions today: 

1. What is the magnitude of the opioid abuse problem in the United States? 

2. Which are the higher-risk opioids and where are they being prescribed? 

3. What are the major recommendations to address overprescribing of opioids? 

4. What major actions actually have been taken nationally to address opioid overprescribing? 

5. Are VHA’s actions, as a system, adequate and consistent with the national momentum on this issue? 

6. What more could VHA do to improve opioid prescribing? 

THE FIRST QUESTION TO ASK IS

‘‘WHAT IS THE MAGNITUDE OF THE OPIOID ABUSE PROBLEM IN THE UNITED STATES?’’ 

According to the CDC: 1

• From 1999 through 2012, the age-adjusted drug-poisoning death rate nationwide more than doubled, from 6.1 per 100,000 population in 1999 to 13.1 in 2012 

(Table 1). 

• During the same period, the age-adjusted rates for drug-poisoning deaths involving opioid analgesics more than tripled, from 1.4 per 100,000 in 1999 to 5.1 in 

2012 (Figure 1). Opioid-analgesic death rates increased at a fast pace from 1999 

through 2006, with an average increase of about 18% each year, and then at a slower pace from 2006 forward. The 5% decline in opioid-analgesic death rates from 2011 

through 2012, is the first decrease seen in more than a decade. 

• Also from 1999 through 2012, the age-adjusted rates for drug-poisoning deaths 

involving heroin nearly tripled, from 0.7 deaths per 100,000 in 1999 to 1.9 in 2012. 

The rates increased substantially beginning in 2006. Between 2011 and 2012, the 

rate of drug-poisoning deaths involving heroin increased 35%, from 1.4 per 100,000 

to 1.9. 

• In 2012, 14 states had age-adjusted drug-poisoning death rates that were significantly higher than the overall U.S. rate of 13.1 per 100,000 population (Figure 

2). The states with the highest rates per 100,000 population were West Virginia 

(32.0), Kentucky (25.0), New Mexico (24.7), Utah (23.1), and Nevada (21.0). 

• In 2012, there were 41,502 deaths due to drug poisoning (often referred to as 

drug-overdose deaths) in the United States (Table 1), of which 16,007 [38.6%] involved opioid analgesics and 5,925 involved heroin. 

62 

2 Benzodiazepines are antianxiety drugs like alprazolam (Versed), diazepam (Valium), and 

chlordiazepoxide (Librium). The class includes approximately 39 unique agents. 3 In September 2013, FDA announced labeling changes for these products. The updated labeling states that ER/LA opioids are indicated for the management of pain severe enough to require daily, around-the-clock, long-term opioid treatment and for which alternative treatment 

options are inadequate. 4 CDC Vital Signs (Weekly): Variation Among States in Prescribing of Opioid Pain Relievers 

and Benzodiazepines—United States, 2012. MMWR July 4, 2014/63(26);563–568 

THE SECOND QUESTION RELATES TO THE PRESCRIBING PATTERNS. ‘‘WHICH ARE THE

HIGHER-RISK OPIOIDS AND WHERE ARE THEY BEING PRESCRIBED?’’ 

CDC recently studied 2012 prescribing patterns of 57,000 pharmacies, which dispense nearly 80% of the retail prescriptions in the United States. Prescriptions included in the study were dispensed at retail pharmacies and paid for by commercial 

insurance, Medicaid, Medicare, or cash. The study examined prescribing patterns for 

opioid pain relievers (OPRs), long acting/extended release (LA/ER) OPRs, high dose 

OPRs, and benzodiazepines.2 According to CDC, LA/ER OPRs are more prone to 

abuse, and high-dose formulations were more likely to result in overdoses, so they 

deserved special focus; Benzodiazepines were often prescribed in combination with 

OPR, even though this combination increases the risk for overdose.3

The updated labeling further clarifies that, because of the risks of addiction, 

abuse, and misuse, even at recommended doses, and because of the greater risks 

of overdose and death, these drugs should be reserved for use in patients for whom 

alternative treatment options (e.g., non-opioid analgesics or immediate-release 

opioids) are ineffective, not tolerated, or would be otherwise inadequate to provide 

sufficient management of pain; ER/LA opioid analgesics are not indicated for asneeded pain relief. 

CDC found that State prescribing rates varied for all drug types (See Table 2) 

with rates that were 2.7fold for OPR and 22fold for one type of OPR, oxymorphone. 

Overall, prescribing rates varied widely by state for all drug types (See table 2). 

When looking for patterns by Region, the southern US had the highest rate of prescribing OPR and benzodiazepines. The Northeast had the highest rate for high-dose 

OPR and long acting and extended release OPR, although high rates also were observed in individual states in the South and West. In the Northeast, 17.8% of OPR 

prescribed were LA/ER OPR. States in the South ranked highest for all individual 

opioids except for hydromorphone, fentanyl, and methadone, for which the highest 

rates were in Vermont, North Dakota, and Oregon, respectively.4

THE THIRD QUESTION IS ‘‘WHAT ARE THE MAJOR RECOMMENDATIONS TO ADDRESS

OVERPRESCRIBING OF OPIOIDS?’’ 

In the general US population, Center for Disease Control recommends: 

• Use of prescription data combined with insurance restrictions to prevent ‘‘doctor 

shopping’’ and reduce inappropriate use of opioids. 

– Users of multiple providers for the same drug, people routinely obtaining 

early refills, and persons engaged in other inappropriate behaviors can be 

tracked with state prescription drug monitoring programs or insurance claim information. 

– Public and private insurers can limit the reimbursement of claims for opioid 

prescriptions to a designated doctor and a designated pharmacy. This action is 

especially important for public insurers because Medicaid recipients and other 

low-income populations are at high risk for prescription drug overdose. Insurers 

also can identify inappropriate use of certain opioids for certain diagnoses (e.g., 

the use of extended-release or long-acting opioids like transdermal fentanyl or 

methadone for short-term pain). 

• Improving legislation and enforcement of existing laws. 

– Most states now have laws against doctor shopping, but they are not enforced 

uniformly. In contrast, only a few states have laws regulating for-profit clinics 

that distribute controlled prescription drugs with minimal medical evaluation. 

Laws against such ‘‘pill mills’’ as well as laws that require physical examinations before prescribing might help reduce the diversion of these drugs for nonmedical use. 

– In addition, a variety of other state controls on prescription fraud are being 

employed. For example, according to the National Alliance for Model State Drug 

Laws, 15 states required or permitted pharmacists to request identification from 

persons obtaining controlled substances as of March 2009. 

• Improve medical practice in prescribing opioids. 

63 

5 CDC Grand Rounds (Weekly): Prescription Drug Overdoses—a U.S. Epidemic; January 13, 

2012/61(01);10–13. 

– Care for patients with complex chronic pain problems is challenging, and 

many prescribers receive little education on this topic. As a result, prescribers 

too often start patients on opioids and expect unreasonable benefits from the 

treatment. In a prospective, population-based study of injured workers with 

compensable low back pain, 38% of the workers received an opioid early in their 

care, most at the first doctor visit. Among the 6% who went on to receive opioids 

for chronic pain for 1 year, most did not report clinically meaningful improvement in pain and function, even though their opioid dose rose significantly over 

the year. 

– Evidence-based guidelines can educate prescribers regarding the under-appreciated risks and frequently exaggerated benefits of high-dose opioid therapy. 

Such guidelines especially are needed for emergency departments because persons at greater risk for overdose frequently visit emergency departments seeking drugs. Guidelines will be more effective if health system or payer reviews 

hold prescribers accountable for their behaviors. 

• Develop a public health approach of secondary and tertiary prevention measures to improve emergency and long term treatment. 

– Overdose ‘‘harm reduction’’ programs emphasize broader distribution (to nonmedical users) of an opioid antidote, naloxone, that can be used in an emergency by anyone witnessing an overdose. Efforts also are under way to increase 

the ability of professionals responding to emergencies to administer optimum 

treatment for overdoses. 

– Substance abuse treatment programs also reduce the risk for overdose death. 

Continued efforts are needed to remove barriers to shifting such programs from 

methadone clinics to office-based care using buprenorphine. Office-based care 

can be less stigmatizing and more accessible to all patients, especially those residing in rural areas.5

The National Association of Boards of Pharmacy recommends: 

• Recognizing ‘‘red flag’’ warnings. These warnings are based on how the patient 

presents, how the medication has been taken, how the patient is communicating, 

and how the patient does (or does not) participate in the treatment plan. 

• Based on patient populations and behaviors, physicians and pharmacists should 

identify situations that indicate whether a patient may be more likely to be abusing 

or diverting prescription drugs. 

• When warning signs are present, health care practitioners should immediately 

assess the situation and/or the patient’s medical and psychological condition and determine the appropriate action (e.g., continuation of treatment, intensify monitoring, 

refer for substance use/addiction treatment, refuse to issue/dispense a prescription). 

The Behavioral Health Coordinating Committee of the Prescription Drug Abuse 

Subcommittee of Health and Human Services recommends (in addition to activities 

underway; See Appendix I for details): 

• Strengthen surveillance systems and capacity 

• Build the evidence-base for prescription drug abuse prevention programs 

• Enhance coordination of patient, public, and provider education programs 

among Federal agencies 

• Further develop targeted patient, public, and provider education programs 

• Support efforts to increase provider use of Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs (PDMPs) 

• Leverage health information technology to improve clinical care and reduce 

abuse 

• Synthesize pain management guideline recommendations and incorporate them 

into clinical decision support tools 

• Collaborate with insurers and pharmacy benefit managers to implement robust 

claims review programs 

• Collaborate with insurers and pharmacy benefit managers to identify and implement robust programs that improve oversight of high-risk prescribing. 

• Improve analytic tools for regulatory and oversight purposes 

• Continue efforts to integrate drug abuse treatment and primary care 

• Expand efforts to increase access to medication-assisted treatment 

• Expand Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment services 

• Prevent opioid overdose through new formulations of naloxone 

64 

THE FOURTH QUESTION IS ‘‘WHAT MAJOR ACTIONS ACTUALLY HAVE BEEN TAKEN

NATIONALLY TO ADDRESS OPIOID OVERPRESCRIBING?’’ 

The States have taken various actions to control opioid prescribing. As automation 

has improved, States have introduced electronic prescription monitoring systems to 

aggregate data, for use by health care providers and enforcement agencies. 

• In one example, New York established the Prescription Monitoring Program 

(PMP) on August 27, 2013. Most prescribers are required to consult the PMP Registry when writing prescriptions for Schedule II, III, and IV controlled substances. 

The PMP Registry provides practitioners with direct, secure access to view dispensed controlled substance prescription histories for their patients. The PMP is 

available 24 hours a day/7 days a week. Patient reports include all controlled substances that were dispensed in New York State and reported by the pharmacy/dispenser for the past six months. This information will allow practitioners to better 

evaluate their patients’ treatment with controlled substances and determine whether there may be abuse or non-medical use. 

Many States and professional associations have published pain treatment guidelines to better inform prescribers of evidence-based treatment guidelines for pain. 

• For example, the Medical Board of California published Guidelines for Prescribing Controlled Substances for Pain in 2014 (http://www.mbc.ca.gov/licensees/ 

prescribing/pain_guidelines.pdf) This comprehensive, 90 page document includes information for providers on the various types of pain, considerations of treating pain 

in different populations, patient treatment options and risks, and patient contracts 

(which include agreement to urine screening). Similarly, the state of Washington 

has published comprehensive guidelines (http://www.agencymeddirectors.wa.gov/ 

files/opioidgdline.pdf) 

• As an example of a professional association guideline, the American Society of 

Anesthesiologists Task Force on Chronic Pain Management and the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine published updated practice guidelines 

for chronic pain management. 

Regulators have taken action to better educate providers and improve labeling. 

• The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) required manufacturers to make educational materials available for prescribers and patients based on FDA-approved 

materials for continuing education for prescribers. 

• FDA established a Web site to assist providers in quickly identifying and accessing educational programs (https://search.er-la-opioidrems.com/Guest/GuestPage 

External.aspx) 

• FDA changed labeling on long acting opioid drugs. Older labeling stated that 

’’[Name of drug] is indicated for the relief of moderate to severe pain in patients 

requiring continuous around the clock opioid treatment for an extended period of 

time.’’ Newer labeling states that ’’[Name of drug] is indicated for the management 

of pain severe enough to require continuous around the clock opioid treatment and 

for which alternative treatment options are inadequate.’’ 

• FDA required a new boxed warning on long acting opioid drugs that increased 

emphasis on risks, including abuse, overdose, death, and Neonatal Opioid Withdrawal Syndrome 

• FDA’s newer labeling urges prescribers to ‘‘assess each patient’s risk’’ for abuse 

before prescribing and to ‘‘monitor all patients regularly for the development of 

abuse.’’ 

• FDA has recently approved several ‘‘abuse deterrent’’ opioids to minimize the 

risk for prescription diversion or abuse. 

• FDA approved a naloxone auto-injectable product for the emergency treatment 

of known or suspected opioid overdose outside of a healthcare setting. Naloxone is 

a medication that rapidly reverses the effects of opioid overdose. 

National enforcement agencies have taken action to require more frequent prescribing by providers. Previously, opioid combination products could be prescribed 

for up to a 30 day supply with 5 refills (e.g., up to a 6 month period between physician visits). That changed under new DEA rules: 

• Hydrocodone combination products are now in a more restrictive category of 

controlled substances, along with other opioid drugs for pain like morphine and 

oxycodone. After a scientific review, FDA made the recommendation that DEA take 

this step. 

– If a patient needs additional medication, the prescriber must issue a new 

prescription. Phone-in refills for these products are no longer allowed. 

– In emergencies, small supplies can be authorized until a new prescription 

can be provided for the patient. 

65 

6 VHA defines higher-risk patients as those receiving prescriptions of greater than (or equal 

to) 100 morphine sulfate equivalent doses dispensed (100 MEDD). 7http://www.rti.org/newsroom/news.cfm?obj=01E25DFA–9549–3A9E–0A638C19F38BDD1E 

– Patients will still have access to reasonable quantities of medication, generally up to a 30-day supply. 

• In addition, DEA continues its community ‘‘Take Back’’ programs to assist consumers in the proper disposal of unused medication, including opioid prescriptions. 

THE FIFTH QUESTION IS: ‘‘ARE VHA’S ACTIONS, AS A SYSTEM, ADEQUATE AND

CONSISTENT WITH THE NATIONAL MOMENTUM ON THIS ISSUE?’’ 

• In August 2013, VHA implemented a national opioid surveillance program 

(Opioid Safety Initiative) to monitor utilization. The program analyzes data to identify outliers in terms of opioid (and benzodiazepine) prescribing and refers that information to VA medical centers for more critical evaluation and action, as appropriate. Recent VHA prescription dispensing data shows improvement since the implementation of the program. For example, VHA has advised that: 

– In Q4 FY 2012, 59,499 patients were dispensed greater than 100 MEDD.6 By 

Q1 FY 2015, only 49,356 patients were dispensed greater than 100 MEDD—a 

17% reduction. 

– From Q4 FY 2012 through Q1 FY 2015, 91,614 fewer patients received 

an opioid prescription. This reduction was seen despite an overall increase 

(1.8% -from 3,966,139 to 4,035,695) in the number of pharmacy patients during 

the same period. 

– From Q4 FY 2012 through Q1 FY 2015, there were 67.466 fewer pharmacy 

patients on long term opioids. During this same period, urine drug screening 

(screening essential to detecting potential drug diversion) increased by 71,255 

patients. 

• In 2014, outside research experts assessed VHA’s opioid utilization and testified 

before the U.S. Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs that VHA was exercising appropriate vigilance. ‘‘The research, funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse, 

showed that the percentage of VHA patients with chronic pain who receive higher 

doses of opioids is relatively small and lower than those in other health care systems. The amount of days in which chronic pain patients receive opioids is typically 

higher within the VHA; however, the median dose of opioids is lower than other 

health care systems, according to Edlund*** Edlund reported that the VHA, 

overall, screens out substance abuse patients from high use of opioids better than 

other health care systems.’’ 7

• VHA has published opioid treatment guidelines (with education and decision 

support tools and pocket guides) in 2010, updated in 2013 (http://www.healthquality 

.va.gov/guidelines/Pain/cot/) In addition, VHA’s treatment guidelines for substance 

use disorder (http://www.healthquality.va.gov/guidelines/MH/sud/) are directly 

linked to and complement the opioid guidelines. These guidelines are equally comprehensive to the State and professional guidelines cited previously. 

• Academic detailing is a model of peer based education intended to improve prescribing performance (http://www.narcad.org/) where there is a gap between best 

practice and current treatment patterns. VHA conducted a 3 year pilot of academic 

detailing program to change prescribing habits in a variety of practice settings. 

Based on the extraordinary success of VHA’s initial pilot, the program will be expanded nationwide and include opioid prescribing as one of the focus areas. 

• VHA has developed software to interact with State Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs (PDMPs). This will ensure that opioid prescriptions for Veterans 

receiving purchased care and/or VHA care are monitored consistently. (But deployment of the software has been problematic. See recommendation below.) 

• VHA has expanded its health care model to include treatment modalities (e.g., 

chiropractic care, yoga, acupuncture, etc.) that can provide attractive alternatives to 

opioid treatment. 

• In 2014, VHA has instituted a naloxone distribution program (http://www.pbm 

.va.gov/PBM/clinicalguidance/clinicalrecommendations/Naloxone_Kits_Recommenda 

tions_for_Use_Rev_Sep_2014.pdf) to reverse life-threatening opioid overdoses. The 

program has already literally saved lives. 

• VHA has increased its use of injectable naltrexone, a drug used to prevent relapse after opioid detoxification. 

• VHA has a robust substance use disorder program that can support provider 

and patient efforts to discontinue opioid use when addiction and abuse is apparent. 

66 

• VHA has a national Pain Management Office that coordinates information and 

programs to ensure that providers have the most current information at their fingertips (http://www.va.gov/PAINMANAGEMENT/Clinical_Resources.asp) 

THE FINAL QUESTION IS

‘‘WHAT MORE COULD VHA DO TO IMPROVE OPIOID PRESCRIBING?’’ 

While overprescribing patterns are improving, there is always more that can be 

done to ensure continued progress. VHA should: 

• Resource the national opioid surveillance and academic detailing initiatives appropriately to ensure success. Many of the initiatives are currently minimally 

staffed and sustainment is at risk if staffing is not adequate. 

• Expedite VA’s deployment of software to interact with State Prescription Drug 

Monitoring Programs (PDMP). The deployment is at risk due to an assessment by 

the Office of Information Technology of a security risk. The Department should be 

encouraged to report its progress on a quarterly basis to drive this to successful resolution. 

In conclusion, I find that the actions of VHA, as a system, are consistent with 

the national momentum on this issue. I reached this conclusion based on the review 

of outside studies, VHA’s internal surveillance data, and my own evaluation relative 

to other national and State program benchmarks. I believe that this momentum can 

be sustained and improved given adequate resources. 

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, I wish to thank you for this opportunity to present this perspective today. 

Figure 1. Age-adjusted drug-poisoning death rates: United States 1999–2012 

NOTE: Drug-poisoning deaths may involve both opioid analgesics and heroin. 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Vital Statistics System, Mortality File. 


326apLVD8.eps
67 

Figure 2. Age-adjusted drug-poisoning death rates, by state: United States, 

2012 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Vital Statistics System, Mortality File. 

Table 1. Number and age-adjusted rate of drug-poisoning deaths involving opioid analgesics 

and heroin: United States, 1999-2012 

bYear 

All Opioid analgesics Heroin 

Number Rate Number Rate Number Rate 

1999 ................................................................................... 16,849 6 .1 4,030 1 .4 1,960 0 .7 

2000 ................................................................................... 17,415 6 .2 4,400 1 .5 1,842 0 .7 

2001 ................................................................................... 19,394 6 .8 5,528 1 .9 1,779 0 .6 

2002 ................................................................................... 23,518 8 .2 7,456 2 .6 2,089 0 .7 

2003 ................................................................................... 25,785 8 .9 8,517 2 .9 2,080 0 .7 

2004 ................................................................................... 27,424 9 .4 9,857 3 .4 1,878 0 .6 

2005 ................................................................................... 29,813 10 .1 10,928 3 .7 2,009 0 .7 

2006 ................................................................................... 34,425 11 .5 13,723 4 .6 2,088 0 .7 

2007 ................................................................................... 36,010 11 .9 14,408 4 .8 2,399 0 .8 

2008 ................................................................................... 36,450 11 .9 14,800 4 .8 3,041 1 .0 

2009 ................................................................................... 37,004 11 .9 15,597 5 .0 3,278 1 .1 

2010 ................................................................................... 38,329 12 .3 16,651 5 .4 3,036 1 .0 

2011 ................................................................................... 41,340 13 .2 16,917 5 .4 4,397 1 .4 

2012 ................................................................................... 41,502 13 .1 16,007 5 .1 5,925 1 .9 

NOTES: Deaths are classified using the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD—10). Drug-poisoning deaths are identified using ICD—10 underlying cause-of-death codes X40—X44, X60—X64, X85, and Y10—Y14. Opioid-analgesic drug-poisoning deaths are 

drug-poisoning deaths with a multiple cause-of-death code of T40.2, T40.3, or T40.4. Heroin drug-poisoning deaths are drug-poisoning deaths 

with a multiple cause-of-death code of T40.1. Approximately 25% of drug-poisoning deaths lack information on the specific drugs involved. 

Some of these deaths may have involved heroin, opioid analgesics, or both. 

SOURCE: CDC/NCHS, National Vital Statistics System, Mortality File 

Table 2. Prescribing rates per 100 persons, by State and drug type— 

IMS Health, United States, 2012 

State 

Opioid pain 

relievers Rank 

Long-acting/ 

extended-release opioid 

pain relievers Rank 

High-dose 

opioid pain 

relievers Rank 

Benzodiazepines Rank 

Alabama .................................................... 142 .9 1 12 .4 22 6 .8 4 61 .9 2 

Alaska ........................................................ 65 .1 46 10 .7 31 4 .2 26 24 .0 50 

Arizona ....................................................... 82 .4 26 14 .5 12 5 .5 12 34 .3 33 

Arkansas .................................................... 115 .8 8 9 .6 37 4 .1 29 50 .8 8 

California ................................................... 57 .0 50 5 .8 49 3 .0 42 25 .4 47 

Colorado ..................................................... 71 .2 40 11 .8 24 4 .1 31 28 .0 44 


326apLVD9.eps
68 

Table 2. Prescribing rates per 100 persons, by State and drug type— 

IMS Health, United States, 2012—Continued 

State 

Opioid pain 

relievers Rank 

Long-acting/ 

extended-release opioid 

pain relievers Rank 

High-dose 

opioid pain 

relievers Rank 

Benzodiazepines Rank 

Connecticut ................................................ 72 .4 38 14 .1 13 5 .4 13 46 .2 11 

Delaware .................................................... 90 .8 17 21 .7 2 8 .8 1 41 .5 19 

District of Columbia .................................. 85 .7 23 13 .7 17 5 .7 10 38 .4 24 

Florida ........................................................ 72 .7 37 11 .3 26 6 .6 5 46 .9 10 

Georgia ...................................................... 90 .7 18 8 .6 43 4 .1 30 37 .0 27 

Hawaii ........................................................ 52 .0 51 8 .8 42 3 .9 36 19 .3 51 

Idaho .......................................................... 85 .6 24 10 .3 33 3 .9 34 29 .1 42 

Illinois ........................................................ 67 .9 43 5 .2 50 2 .0 50 34 .2 34 

Indiana ...................................................... 109 .1 9 10 .7 30 4 .9 20 42 .9 17 

Iowa ........................................................... 72 .8 36 7 .3 47 2 .2 48 37 .3 26 

Kansas ....................................................... 93 .8 16 10 .3 34 4 .0 32 38 .9 23 

Kentucky .................................................... 128 .4 4 11 .6 25 5 .0 19 57 .4 5 

Louisiana ................................................... 118 .0 7 7 .8 46 3 .6 39 51 .5 7 

Maine ......................................................... 85 .1 25 21 .8 1 5 .6 11 40 .7 22 

Maryland .................................................... 74 .3 33 16 .0 6 5 .0 18 29 .9 40 

Massachusetts ........................................... 70 .8 41 14 .9 8 3 .5 41 48 .8 9 

Michigan .................................................... 107 .0 10 9 .1 40 4 .5 22 45 .5 14 

Minnesota .................................................. 61 .6 48 10 .2 35 2 .2 49 24 .9 48 

Mississippi ................................................. 120 .3 6 7 .2 48 2 .9 43 46 .2 12 

Missouri ..................................................... 94 .8 14 9 .5 38 3 .5 40 42 .6 18 

Montana ..................................................... 82 .0 27 14 .0 15 4 .4 23 33 .7 35 

Nebraska .................................................... 79 .4 28 7 .8 45 2 .3 46 35 .0 32 

Nevada ....................................................... 94 .1 15 14 .8 10 8 .2 3 37 .5 25 

New Hampshire ......................................... 71 .7 39 19 .6 3 6 .1 7 41 .2 21 

New Jersey ................................................. 62 .9 47 11 .3 27 5 .8 9 36 .5 28 

New Mexico ................................................ 73 .8 35 12 .7 21 3 .8 38 31 .5 37 

New York .................................................... 59 .5 49 9 .5 39 4 .3 24 27 .3 45 

North Carolina ........................................... 96 .6 13 13 .7 18 4 .3 25 45 .3 15 

North Dakota ............................................. 74 .7 32 10 .5 32 2 .3 47 31 .1 39 

Ohio ........................................................... 100 .1 12 11 .2 28 4 .2 27 41 .3 20 

Oklahoma ................................................... 127 .8 5 12 .8 20 6 .0 8 44 .5 16 

Oregon ....................................................... 89 .2 20 18 .8 4 5 .2 16 31 .4 38 

Pennsylvania .............................................. 88 .2 21 14 .9 9 5 .4 14 46 .1 13 

Rhode Island ............................................. 89 .6 19 14 .0 14 5 .2 17 60 .2 4 

South Carolina ........................................... 101 .8 11 11 .0 29 3 .9 33 52 .6 6 

South Dakota ............................................. 66 .5 45 9 .0 41 2 .5 45 28 .0 43 

Tennessee .................................................. 142 .8 2 18 .2 5 8 .7 2 61 .4 3 

Texas .......................................................... 74 .3 34 4 .2 51 1 .9 51 29 .8 41 

Utah ........................................................... 85 .8 22 12 .1 23 5 .3 15 35 .9 30 

Vermont ..................................................... 67 .4 44 13 .9 16 4 .7 21 35 .5 31 

Virginia ...................................................... 77 .5 29 9 .9 36 3 .8 37 36 .4 29 

Washington ................................................ 77 .3 30 14 .6 11 4 .1 28 27 .1 46 

West Virginia ............................................. 137 .6 3 15 .7 7 6 .2 6 71 .9 1 

Wisconsin ................................................... 76 .1 31 13 .1 19 3 .9 35 33 .4 36 

Wyoming .................................................... 69 .6 42 8 .0 44 2 .7 44 24 .1 49 

Mean .......................................................... 87 .3 — 12 .0 — 4 .5 — 39 .2 — 

Standard deviation .................................... 22 .4 — 3 .9 — 1 .6 — 11 .1 — 

Coefficient of variation ............................. 0 .26 — 0 .32 — 0 .36 — 0 .28 — 

Median ....................................................... 82 .4 — 11 .3 — 4 .2 — 37 .3 — 

25th percentile .......................................... 71 .7 — 9 .5 — 3 .7 — 31 .1 — 

75th percentile .......................................... 96 .6 — 14 .1 — 5 .4 — 46 .1 — 

Interquartile ratio ...................................... 1 .3 — 1 .5 — 1 .4 — 1 .5 — 

69 

APPENDIX 1 

DECEMBER 5, 2013 REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE BEHAVIORAL HEALTH COORDINATING COMMITTEE OF THE PRESCRIPTION DRUG ABUSE SUBCOMMITTEE OF

HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

• Enhance surveillance: 

– Review current surveillance systems to identify ways to better detect changing patterns of abuse and health outcomes, and inform policy decisions and programmatic interventions. 

– Explore the predictive value of potential measures of abuse such as doctorshopping metrics in claims data and other data sources. 

– Examine the role of prescriber dispensing in prescription drug abuse and 

overdose. 

– Better understand the relationship of opioid dose and duration that increases 

the risk of abuse and overdose. 

– Explore risk factors for addiction among patients receiving opioids for legitimate medical purposes. 

– Examine potential unintended consequences that may result of interventions 

aimed at reducing prescription drug abuse, such as a decrease in legitimate access to pain treatment. 

• Enhance drug abuse prevention (through HHS funded research) 

– Evaluate the effectiveness of drug abuse prevention programs to reduce prescription drug abuse in order to inform the implementation of evidence-based 

programs. 

– Conduct social science research to understand the initiation of prescription 

drug abuse and to identify risk and protective factors to prevent initiation. 

– Evaluate the impact of medication disposal programs on prescription drug 

abuse and overdose. Evaluations should include sampling to determine the proportion of returned drugs that are controlled substances. 

• Enhance patient and public education. 

– Convene Federal agencies to assure that patient education activities and 

messaging is evidence-based and consistent across agencies. 

– Leverage DEA’s National Take Back Days, International Overdose Awareness Day, National Substance Abuse Prevention Month, National Drug Facts 

Week, and other special occasions as opportunities to highlight the dangers of 

prescription drug abuse to patients across the U.S. 

– Partner with professional societies, patient education organizations, and others to expand targeted patient education programs, focusing on the addiction 

risks of medications, the dangers of mixing medications or mixing them with 

alcohol, and what patients can do to safeguard their medications. 

– Work with public and private insurers and pharmacy benefit managers to include targeted educational information to beneficiaries receiving opioid analgesics and other prescription drugs prone to abuse based on demographics, medications prescribed, and conditions being treated. 

– Conduct research to determine the effectiveness of patient education programs and use the findings to inform future educational programs. 

• Enhance provider education. 

– Convene Federal agencies to further coordinate the development and dissemination of provider education programs to ensure maximum reach and benefit. 

– Partner with health professional schools, educational accrediting bodies and 

professional societies to continue development of targeted educational programs 

to meet the needs of different types of providers and practice settings. 

– Evaluate educational programs to determine the most effective programs 

with respect to changing provider behavior, improving prescribing, and reducing 

abuse and overdose. 

– Conduct research to determine the most effective ways to provide educational 

programs and training to providers. 

• Enhance Clinical Practice Tools 

– Convene professional societies to identify barriers and potential incentives to 

increase provider use of Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs (PDMPs). 

– Partner with electronic health record (EHR)/Health Information Technology 

(HIT) stakeholders to expand the ongoing work of the Health eDecisions (HeD) 

project to identify, define, and harmonize standards to transmit data for use in 

clinical decision support, including incorporating data from state PDMPs, 

70 

screening tools such as Screening, Brief Intervention, and Referral to Treatment 

clinical decision support, and other relevant clinical information. 

– Work with stakeholders to harmonize the data standards necessary for the 

interoperable exchange of PDMP data with EHRs. 

– Support pilot projects focused on the use of EHRs and health information exchanges (HIEs) to improve clinical decisionmaking through real-time access to 

intrastate and interstate PDMP data. 

– Support efforts to integrate clinical tools into EHRs and other electronic 

media to provide just in time information to improve clinical decisionmaking. 

– Convene professional societies and subject matter experts to synthesize information from available pain management guidelines and the published literature 

to develop a set of prescribing recommendations that can be incorporated into 

clinical decision support tools. 

– Conduct research to determine the impact of opioid prescribing guidelines on 

prescribing behaviors and health outcomes such as opioid abuse and overdose. 

– Test the effectiveness of clinical decision support tools designed to improve 

care and reduce prescription drug abuse and overdose. 

– Partner with health information technology developers and healthcare providers to validate electronic screening tools and clinical decision support tools 

in EHRs. 

• Opportunities to enhance regulatory oversight 

– Convene partners to develop indicators of inappropriate prescribing and patient abuse that can be applied in regulatory and oversight settings. 

– Encourage insurers and pharmacy benefit managers to regularly review 

claims data and PDMP data, where available, to identify and address healthcare providers prescribing outside of accepted medical standards and patients 

at high-risk for overdose. 

– Collaborate with state Medicaid programs, other public and private insurers, 

and pharmacy benefit managers to identify and implement robust programs 

that improve oversight of high-risk prescribing. 

– Collaborate with stakeholders to research the effectiveness of insurer benefit 

designs aimed at reducing prescription drug abuse, and pill mill and doctor 

shopping laws, including unintended consequences of these laws. 

• Enhance drug abuse treatment 

– Partner with professional societies to identify barriers and promote the integration of drug abuse treatment, including SBIRT and medication assisted 

treatment, and primary care. 

– Collaborate with states, national associations, insurers, and PBMS to assure 

standard benefit packages cover medication-assisted treatment and SBIRT, and 

to develop reimbursement strategies that will increase the number of primary 

care providers offering such treatment in a variety of medical settings. 

– Partner with public and private insurers to develop and disseminate materials to inform healthcare providers about SBIRT billing codes and other administrative information. 

– Work with researchers and drug manufacturers to develop additional medical 

treatments for opioid addiction and new medical treatments for addiction to 

other abused prescription drugs. 

– Support the development and testing of behavioral interventions for screening and treating prescription drug abuse, including interventions targeting 

youth and pregnant women. 

• Enhance overdose prevention 

– Expand efforts to support the development of new formulations of naloxone, 

such as nasal spray or auto-injector formulations. 

– Partner with national, state and local EMS and other first responder organizations to disseminate information on the use of naloxone. 

– Evaluate naloxone programs to better understand how and under what conditions it is most effectively being used. 

– Examine the impact of immunity from prosecution laws. 

71 

LETTER SUBMITTED BY HON. TAMMY BALDWIN FROM NATIONAL ALLIANCE ON

MENTAL ILLNESS


326Q2NAMIltr1.eps
72 


326Q2NAMIltr2.eps
73 

ARTICLE SUBMITTED BY G. CALEB ALEXANDER, MD: OPIOID PRESCRIBING: A 

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF GUIDELINES FOR CHRONIC PAIN


326psACA1.eps
74 


326psACA2.eps
75 


326psACA3.eps
76 


326psACA4.eps
77 


326psACA5.eps
78 


326psACA6.eps
79 


326psACA7.eps
80 


326psACA8.eps
81 


326psACA9.eps
82 


326psACA10.eps
83 


326psACA11.eps
84 


326psACA12.eps
85 


326psACA13.eps
86 


326psACA14.eps
87 


326psACA15.eps
88 

REPORT SUBMITTED BY G. CALEB ALEXANDER, MD: THE PRESCRIPTION OPIOID AND

HEROIN CRISIS: A PUBLIC HEALTH APPROACH TO AN EPIDEMIC OF ADDICTION


326psAAR1.eps
89 


326psAAR2.eps
90 


326psAAR3.eps
91 


326psAAR4.eps
92 


326psAAR5.eps
93 


326psAAR6.eps
94 


326psAAR7.eps
95 


326psAAR8.eps
96 


326psAAR9.eps
97 


326psAAR10.eps
98 


326psAAR11.eps
99 


326psAAR12.eps
100 


326psAAR13.eps
101 


326psAAR14.eps
102 


326psAAR15.eps
103 


326psAAR16.eps
104 


326psAAR17.eps
105 


326psAAR18.eps
106 


326psAAR19.eps
107 


326psAAR20.eps
108 


326psAAR21.eps
109 

Æ 


326psAAR22.eps