Requests Louisiana medical schools, prescriber licensing boards, and prescriber trade associations to take all necessary steps to eliminate pain as the fifth vital sign and to increase prescriber education and awareness on assessing, identifying, and treating the symptom of pain.
The resolution reflects a growing concern surrounding the opioid crisis, highlighting that since pain was recognized as the fifth vital sign in the 1990s, there has been a significant rise in opioid prescriptions. This change has inadvertently led to an increase in addiction and tragic outcomes for many patients. By urging medical authorities to shift focus away from pain as a vital sign, they aim to mitigate these issues by promoting alternative pain management techniques and reducing reliance on addictive substances.
SCR21 is a Senate Concurrent Resolution that urges Louisiana medical schools, prescriber licensing boards, and prescriber trade associations to eliminate pain as the fifth vital sign. The resolution emphasizes the necessity of increasing prescriber education and awareness on proper assessment, identification, and treatment of pain. By removing pain from the list of vital signs, the bill seeks to address the unintended consequences of the increased opioid prescriptions that have contributed to the opioid epidemic in Louisiana, which ranks sixth in the nation for volume of pain pill prescriptions.
General sentiment regarding SCR21 appears to be supportive among healthcare professionals and medical advocacy organizations. The American Academy of Family Physicians and the American Medical Society have officially voiced their agreement with the resolution's direction, enhancing the credibility and urgency of the legislative request. However, there may also be concerns regarding how changes to pain management practices would affect patient care and satisfaction.
Notable points of contention surrounding the resolution include the balance between effective pain management and the potential for opioid overprescribing. Supporters argue that the current method of treating pain as a vital sign has led to systemic issues that need addressing. Critics, if any, may fear that removing pain from this status could lead to under-treatment of legitimate pain complaints. The debate underscores the challenges faced when dealing with subjective medical assessments and shaping standard practices in healthcare.