Imagine having a solution that works for you. It manages your pain. You aren't abusing your medication. Your doctor gets this letter and all of a sudden that op

Imagine having a solution that works for you. It manages your pain. You aren't abusing your medication. Your doctor gets this letter and all of a sudden that option is taken away. Now, that drug hasn't been shown to be unacceptable when taken correctly; and you have been. Now you're in pain again and the solution that had been working for you isn't available for some nebulous reason that isn't directly related to the benefit/risk trade-off you and your doctor already agreed to. So, your doctor takes you through trying some other drugs, again, just as they had before they prescribed you opioids - as is current best practice. Of course, now, for your doctor that option of opioid use is no longer available, even though it is still there - out of reach. How would that feel? Living without pain management because your doctor fears losing their licence or a letter from the coroner more than helping you manage your pain. These studies need to ensure doctors are reserving opioids for worst case management, but still prescribing them when nothing less works. These studies need to be longitudinal. Do patients maintain their quality of life? Are doctors trying less addictive/abusable drugs first? Focusing on reduced opioid prescription is like focusing on reducing antibiotic use. You have to track infection rates to gauge if the ineffective usage has gone down while maintaining outcomes. You can't just track usage to gauge the effectiveness of a program. It's a vanity statistic unless you measure outcomes. Outcomes are the whole point.