Showing papers on "Pain assessment published in 2019"

Adult Cancer Pain, Version 3.2019, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

Abstract: In recent years, the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Adult Cancer Pain have undergone substantial revisions focusing on the appropriate and safe prescription of opioid analgesics, optimization of nonopioid analgesics and adjuvant medications, and integration of nonpharmacologic methods of cancer pain management. This selection highlights some of these changes, covering topics on management of adult cancer pain including pharmacologic interventions, nonpharmacologic interventions, and treatment of specific cancer pain syndromes. The complete version of the NCCN Guidelines for Adult Cancer Pain addresses additional aspects of this topic, including pathophysiologic classification of cancer pain syndromes, comprehensive pain assessment, management of pain crisis, ongoing care for cancer pain, pain in cancer survivors, and specialty consultations.

Pregabalin for neuropathic pain in adults.

Abstract: Background This review updates part of an earlier Cochrane Review titled "Pregabalin for acute and chronic pain in adults", and considers only neuropathic pain (pain from damage to nervous tissue). Antiepileptic drugs have long been used in pain management. Pregabalin is an antiepileptic drug used in management of chronic pain conditions. Objectives To assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse effects of pregabalin for chronic neuropathic pain in adults. Search methods We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase for randomised controlled trials from January 2009 to April 2018, online clinical trials registries, and reference lists. Selection criteria We included randomised, double-blind trials of two weeks' duration or longer, comparing pregabalin (any route of administration) with placebo or another active treatment for neuropathic pain, with participant-reported pain assessment. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed trial quality and biases. Primary outcomes were: at least 30% pain intensity reduction over baseline; much or very much improved on the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) Scale (moderate benefit); at least 50% pain intensity reduction; or very much improved on PGIC (substantial benefit). We calculated risk ratio (RR) and number needed to treat for an additional beneficial (NNTB) or harmful outcome (NNTH). We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE. Main results We included 45 studies lasting 2 to 16 weeks, with 11,906 participants - 68% from 31 new studies. Oral pregabalin doses of 150 mg, 300 mg, and 600 mg daily were compared with placebo. Postherpetic neuralgia, painful diabetic neuropathy, and mixed neuropathic pain predominated (85% of participants). High risk of bias was due mainly to small study size (nine studies), but many studies had unclear risk of bias, mainly due to incomplete outcome data, size, and allocation concealment.Postherpetic neuralgia: More participants had at least 30% pain intensity reduction with pregabalin 300 mg than with placebo (50% vs 25%; RR 2.1 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.6 to 2.6); NNTB 3.9 (3.0 to 5.6); 3 studies, 589 participants, moderate-quality evidence), and more had at least 50% pain intensity reduction (32% vs 13%; RR 2.5 (95% CI 1.9 to 3.4); NNTB 5.3 (3.9 to 8.1); 4 studies, 713 participants, moderate-quality evidence). More participants had at least 30% pain intensity reduction with pregabalin 600 mg than with placebo (62% vs 24%; RR 2.5 (95% CI 2.0 to 3.2); NNTB 2.7 (2.2 to 3.7); 3 studies, 537 participants, moderate-quality evidence), and more had at least 50% pain intensity reduction (41% vs 15%; RR 2.7 (95% CI 2.0 to 3.5); NNTB 3.9 (3.1 to 5.5); 4 studies, 732 participants, moderate-quality evidence). Somnolence and dizziness were more common with pregabalin than with placebo (moderate-quality evidence): somnolence 300 mg 16% versus 5.5%, 600 mg 25% versus 5.8%; dizziness 300 mg 29% versus 8.1%, 600 mg 35% versus 8.8%.Painful diabetic neuropathy: More participants had at least 30% pain intensity reduction with pregabalin 300 mg than with placebo (47% vs 42%; RR 1.1 (95% CI 1.01 to 1.2); NNTB 22 (12 to 200); 8 studies, 2320 participants, moderate-quality evidence), more had at least 50% pain intensity reduction (31% vs 24%; RR 1.3 (95% CI 1.2 to 1.5); NNTB 22 (12 to 200); 11 studies, 2931 participants, moderate-quality evidence), and more had PGIC much or very much improved (51% vs 30%; RR 1.8 (95% CI 1.5 to 2.0); NNTB 4.9 (3.8 to 6.9); 5 studies, 1050 participants, moderate-quality evidence). More participants had at least 30% pain intensity reduction with pregabalin 600 mg than with placebo (63% vs 52%; RR 1.2 (95% CI 1.04 to 1.4); NNTB 9.6 (5.5 to 41); 2 studies, 611 participants, low-quality evidence), and more had at least 50% pain intensity reduction (41% vs 28%; RR 1.4 (95% CI 1.2 to 1.7); NNTB 7.8 (5.4 to 14); 5 studies, 1015 participants, low-quality evidence). Somnolence and dizziness were more common with pregabalin than with placebo (moderate-quality evidence): somnolence 300 mg 11% versus 3.1%, 600 mg 15% versus 4.5%; dizziness 300 mg 13% versus 3.8%, 600 mg 22% versus 4.4%.Mixed or unclassified post-traumatic neuropathic pain: More participants had at least 30% pain intensity reduction with pregabalin 600 mg than with placebo (48% vs 36%; RR 1.2 (1.1 to 1.4); NNTB 8.2 (5.7 to 15); 4 studies, 1367 participants, low-quality evidence), and more had at least 50% pain intensity reduction (34% vs 20%; RR 1.5 (1.2 to 1.9); NNTB 7.2 (5.4 to 11); 4 studies, 1367 participants, moderate-quality evidence). Somnolence (12% vs 3.9%) and dizziness (23% vs 6.2%) were more common with pregabalin.Central neuropathic pain: More participants had at least 30% pain intensity reduction with pregabalin 600 mg than with placebo (44% vs 28%; RR 1.6 (1.3 to 2.0); NNTB 5.9 (4.1 to 11); 3 studies, 562 participants, low-quality evidence) and at least 50% pain intensity reduction (26% vs 15%; RR 1.7 (1.2 to 2.3); NNTB 9.8 (6.0 to 28); 3 studies, 562 participants, low-quality evidence). Somnolence (32% vs 11%) and dizziness (23% vs 8.6%) were more common with pregabalin.Other neuropathic pain conditions: Studies show no evidence of benefit for 600 mg pregabalin in HIV neuropathy (2 studies, 674 participants, moderate-quality evidence) and limited evidence of benefit in neuropathic back pain or sciatica, neuropathic cancer pain, or polyneuropathy.Serious adverse events, all conditions: Serious adverse events were no more common with placebo than with pregabalin 300 mg (3.1% vs 2.6%; RR 1.2 (95% CI 0.8 to 1.7); 17 studies, 4112 participants, high-quality evidence) or pregabalin 600 mg (3.4% vs 3.4%; RR 1.1 (95% CI 0.8 to 1.5); 16 studies, 3995 participants, high-quality evidence). Authors' conclusions Evidence shows efficacy of pregabalin in postherpetic neuralgia, painful diabetic neuralgia, and mixed or unclassified post-traumatic neuropathic pain, and absence of efficacy in HIV neuropathy; evidence of efficacy in central neuropathic pain is inadequate. Some people will derive substantial benefit with pregabalin; more will have moderate benefit, but many will have no benefit or will discontinue treatment. There were no substantial changes since the 2009 review.

Cancer Pain Assessment and Classification

Abstract: More than half of patients affected by cancer experience pain of moderate-to-severe intensity, often in multiple sites, and of different etiologies and underlying mechanisms. The heterogeneity of pain mechanisms is expressed with the fluctuating nature of cancer pain intensity and clinical characteristics. Traditional ways of classifying pain in the cancer population include distinguishing pain etiology, clinical characteristics related to pain and the patient, pathophysiology, and the use of already validated classification systems. Concepts like breakthrough, nociceptive, neuropathic, and mixed pain are very important in the assessment of pain in this population of patients. When dealing with patients affected by cancer pain it is also very important to be familiar to the characteristics of specific pain syndromes that are usually encountered. In this article we review methods presently applied for classifying cancer pain highlighting the importance of an accurate clinical evaluation in providing adequate analgesia to patients.

Automatic Recognition Methods Supporting Pain Assessment: A Survey

Abstract: Automated tools for pain assessment have great promise but have not yet become widely used in clinical practice. In this survey paper, we review the literature that proposes and evaluates automatic pain recognition approaches, and discuss challenges and promising directions for advancing this field. Prior to that, we give an overview on pain mechanisms and responses, discuss common clinically used pain assessment tools, and address shared datasets and the challenge of validation in the context of pain recognition.

Current understanding of the mixed pain concept: a brief narrative review

Abstract: Despite having been referenced in the literature for over a decade, the term “mixed pain” has never been formally defined. The strict binary classification of pain as being either purely neuropathi...

Facial expressions of pain in cats: the development and validation of a Feline Grimace Scale.

Abstract: Grimace scales have been used for pain assessment in different species. This study aimed to develop and validate the Feline Grimace Scale (FGS) to detect naturally-occurring acute pain. Thirty-five client-owned and twenty control cats were video-recorded undisturbed in their cages in a prospective, case-control study. Painful cats received analgesic treatment and videos were repeated one hour later. Five action units (AU) were identified: ear position, orbital tightening, muzzle tension, whiskers change and head position. Four observers independently scored (0–2 for each AU) 110 images of control and painful cats. The FGS scores were higher in painful than in control cats; a very strong correlation with another validated instrument for pain assessment in cats was observed (rho = 0.86, p 0.91), and excellent internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.89). The FGS detected response to analgesic treatment (scores after analgesia were lower than before) and a cut-off score was determined (total pain score > 0.39 out of 1.0). The FGS is a valid and reliable tool for acute pain assessment in cats.

The Multimodal Assessment Model of Pain: A Novel Framework for Further Integrating the Subjective Pain Experience Within Research and Practice.

Abstract: Objectives Pain assessment is enigmatic. Although clinicians and researchers must rely upon observations to evaluate pain, the personal experience of pain is fundamentally unobservable. This raises the question of how the inherent subjectivity of pain can and should be integrated within assessment. Current models fail to tackle key facets of this problem, such as what essential aspects of pain are overlooked when we only rely on numeric forms of assessment, and what types of assessment need to be prioritized to ensure alignment with our conceptualization of pain as a subjective experience. We present the multimodal assessment model of pain (MAP) as offering practical frameworks for navigating these challenges. Methods This is a narrative review. Results MAP delineates qualitative (words, behaviors) and quantitative (self-reported measures, non-self-reported measures) assessment and regards the qualitative pain narrative as the best available root proxy for inferring pain in others. MAP offers frameworks to better address pain subjectivity by: (1) delineating separate criteria for identifying versus assessing pain. Pain is identified through narrative reports, while comprehensive assessment is used to infer why pain is reported; (2) integrating compassion-based and mechanism-based management by both validating pain reports and assessing underlying processes; (3) conceptualizing comprehensive pain assessment as both multidimensional and multimodal (listening/observing and measuring); and (4) describing how qualitative data help validate and contextualize quantitative pain measures. Discussion MAP is expected to help clinicians validate pain reports as important and legitimate, regardless of other findings, and help our field develop more comprehensive, valid, and compassionate approaches to assessing pain.

A Review of Pain Assessment Methods in Laboratory Rodents.

Abstract: Ensuring that laboratory rodent pain is well managed underpins the ethical acceptability of working with these animals in research. Appropriate treatment of pain in laboratory rodents requires accurate assessments of the presence or absence of pain to the extent possible. This can be challenging some situations because laboratory rodents are prey species that may show subtle signs of pain. Although a number of standard algesiometry assays have been used to assess evoked pain responses in rodents for many decades, these methods likely represent an oversimplification of pain assessment and many require animal handling during testing, which can result in stress-induced analgesia. More recent pain assessment methods, such as the use of ethograms, facial grimace scoring, burrowing, and nest-building, focus on evaluating changes in spontaneous behaviors or activities of rodents in their home environments. Many of these assessment methods are time-consuming to conduct. While many of these newer tests show promise for providing a more accurate assessment of pain, most require more study to determine their reliability and sensitivity across a broad range of experimental conditions, as well as between species and strains of animals. Regular observation of laboratory rodents before and after painful procedures with consistent use of 2 or more assessment methods is likely to improve pain detection and lead to improved treatment and care-a primary goal for improving overall animal welfare.

Machine learning-based prediction of clinical pain using multimodal neuroimaging and autonomic metrics.

Abstract: Although self-report pain ratings are the gold standard in clinical pain assessment, they are inherently subjective in nature and significantly influenced by multidimensional contextual variables. Although objective biomarkers for pain could substantially aid pain diagnosis and development of novel therapies, reliable markers for clinical pain have been elusive. In this study, individualized physical maneuvers were used to exacerbate clinical pain in patients with chronic low back pain (N = 53), thereby experimentally producing lower and higher pain states. Multivariate machine-learning models were then built from brain imaging (resting-state blood-oxygenation-level-dependent and arterial spin labeling functional imaging) and autonomic activity (heart rate variability) features to predict within-patient clinical pain intensity states (ie, lower vs higher pain) and were then applied to predict between-patient clinical pain ratings with independent training and testing data sets. Within-patient classification between lower and higher clinical pain intensity states showed best performance (accuracy = 92.45%, area under the curve = 0.97) when all 3 multimodal parameters were combined. Between-patient prediction of clinical pain intensity using independent training and testing data sets also demonstrated significant prediction across pain ratings using the combined model (Pearson's r = 0.63). Classification of increased pain was weighted by elevated cerebral blood flow in the thalamus, and prefrontal and posterior cingulate cortices, and increased primary somatosensory connectivity to frontoinsular cortex. Our machine-learning approach introduces a model with putative biomarkers for clinical pain and multiple clinical applications alongside self-report, from pain assessment in noncommunicative patients to identification of objective pain endophenotypes that can be used in future longitudinal research aimed at discovery of new approaches to combat chronic pain.

Management of pain in children and adolescents with cerebral palsy: a systematic review

Abstract: Aim To determine the efficacy of interventions for the management of pain in children and adolescents with cerebral palsy (CP). Method Electronic databases were searched from the earliest date possible to April 2018 using a mixture of subject headings and free text. Inclusion criteria comprised of studies with (1) diagnosis of CP, (2) under the age of 18 years, (3) intervention for the management of pain, (4) outcome measure of pain, and (5) studies published in English-language peer-reviewed journals. Results Fifty-seven studies met the eligibility criteria. Pain related to (n=number of studies): hypertonia (n=17), spastic hip disease (n=13), procedures for the management of CP (n=7), postoperative (n=18), and other (n=2). Most of the studies were of level III to level V evidence. Interpretation There is level II evidence to support intrathecal baclofen therapy for pain secondary to hypertonia in spastic and spastic-dyskinetic CP, and non-pharmacological interventions for procedural pain and pharmacological interventions for postoperative pain. Most studies were restricted by retrospective design and limited use of validated outcome measures. Future research is needed to explore multidisciplinary interventions for chronic pain and pain secondary to dystonia. Clinicians and researchers would benefit from a standardized approach to pain assessment. What this paper adds The strongest evidence exists for pharmacological treatments for postoperative pain in children and adolescents with cerebral palsy (CP). There is moderate evidence for the efficacy of intrathecal baclofen for pain related to hypertonia in predominately spastic CP. There is a lack of standardization in the assessment of pain. There is limited evidence for multimodal and non-pharmacological strategies in paediatric CP.

Assessment of pain in newborn infants.

Abstract: Hospitalized newborn infants experience pain that can have negative short- and long-term consequences and thus should be prevented and treated. National and international guidelines state that adequate pain management requires valid pain assessment. Nociceptive signals cause a cascade of physical and behavioral reactions that alone or in combination can be observed and used to assess the presence and intensity of pain. Units that are caring for newborn infants must adopt sufficient pain assessment tools to cover the gestational ages and pain types that occurs in their setting. Pain assessment should be performed on a regular basis and any detection of pain should be acted on. Future research should focus on developing and validating pain assessment tools for specific situations.

Chronic Pain in the Elderly with Cognitive Decline: A Narrative Review

Abstract: The presence of pain in elderly persons with cognitive decline is often neglected, under-reported, underestimated, misdiagnosed and not adequately treated, with consequences that have a strong impact on health, independence in activities of daily living and quality of life. There is no empirical evidence that people with dementia experience less pain; therefore, in patients with severe cognitive impairment the progression of cognitive decline dramatically affects the ability to verbalize the presence of pain. Self-assessment scales are considered the "gold standard" for pain assessment, but the presence of cognitive impairment is likely to reduce the reliability of these measures. Treatment of pain in elderly with cognitive decline or dementia is based on non-pharmacological and pharmacological strategies. Pharmacological treatment should consider physiological changes, high comorbidity and drug interactions that occur frequently in the elderly. This narrative review aims to describe current knowledge, methods of detection and treatment approaches for chronic pain in elderly persons with cognitive deficits.

Chronic Pain And Health-Related Quality Of Life In Women With Autism And/Or ADHD: A Prospective Longitudinal Study.

Abstract: Purpose: To investigate the prevalence of chronic pain and its association with healthrelated quality of life (HRQoL) in a group of women, diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and/or attention deficit hyperactive disorder (ADHD) in childhood. Patients and methods: Prospective longitudinal 16-19 years follow-up study of 100 Swedish females diagnosed with ASD and/or ADHD in childhood/adolescence. Seventyseven of the women were included in the current sub-study, using validated measures of pain perception and quality of life. Results: A large majority of the women (76.6%) reported chronic pain. HRQoL was low overall and lower still for those reporting chronic pain. Women with ADHD who had ongoing treatment with stimulants reported a significant lower prevalence of chronic widespread pain (CWP) than those not treated. Conclusion: Comorbidity with chronic pain is common in women with ASD and/or ADHD and important to address in the clinic since it is associated with an already low HRQoL. Treatment for ADHD might reduce the pain in some cases. © 2019 Asztely et al.

Clinical Management of Pain in Rodents.

Abstract: The use of effective regimens for mitigating pain remain underutilized in research rodents despite the general acceptance of both the ethical imperative and regulatory requirements intended to maximize animal welfare. Factors contributing to this gap between the need for and the actual use of analgesia include lack of sufficient evidence-based data on effective regimens, under-dosing due to labor required to dose analgesics at appropriate intervals, concerns that the use of analgesics may impact study outcomes, and beliefs that rodents recover quickly from invasive procedures and as such do not need analgesics. Fundamentally, any discussion of clinical management of pain in rodents must recognize that nociceptive pathways and pain signaling mechanisms are highly conserved across mammalian species, and that central processing of pain is largely equivalent in rodents and other larger research species such as dogs, cats, or primates. Other obstacles to effective pain management in rodents have been the lack of objective, science-driven data on pain assessment, and the availability of appropriate pharmacological tools for pain mitigation. To address this deficit, we have reviewed and summarized the available publications on pain management in rats, mice and guinea pigs. Different drug classes and specific pharmacokinetic profiles, recommended dosages, and routes of administration are discussed, and updated recommendations are provided. Nonpharmacologic tools for increasing the comfort and wellbeing of research animals are also discussed. The potential adverse effects of analgesics are also reviewed. While gaps still exist in our understanding of clinical pain management in rodents, effective pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic strategies are available that can and should be used to provide analgesia while minimizing adverse effects. The key to effective clinical management of pain is thoughtful planning that incorporates study needs and veterinary guidance, knowledge of the pharmacokinetics and mechanisms of action of drugs being considered, careful attention to individual differences, and establishing an institutional culture that commits to pain management for all species as a central component of animal welfare.

A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Unguided Electronic and Mobile Health Technologies for Chronic Pain—Is It Time to Start Prescribing Electronic Health Applications?

Abstract: Objective Electronic (eHealth) and mobile (mHealth) technologies may be a useful adjunct to clinicians treating patients with chronic pain. The primary aim of this study was to investigate the effects of eHealth and mHealth interventions that do not require clinician contact or feedback on pain-related outcomes recommended by the Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) guidelines in adults with chronic pain. Methods We searched four databases and included English language randomized controlled trials of ambulatory adults with chronic pain from January, 1 2000, to January 31, 2018, with interventions that are independent of clinician contact or feedback. In the meta-analysis, outcomes were assessed at short- (three months or less), intermediate- (four to six months), and long-term (seven or more months) follow-up. Results Seventeen randomized controlled trials (N = 2,496) were included in the meta-analysis. Both eHealth and mHealth interventions had a significant effect on pain intensity at short- and intermediate-term follow-up. Similarly, a significant but small effect was observed for depression at short- and intermediate-term follow-up and self-efficacy at short-term follow-up. Finally, a significant effect was observed for pain catastrophizing at short-term follow-up. Conclusions eHealth and mHealth interventions had significant effects on multiple short- and intermediate-term outcome measures recommended in the IMMPACT guidelines. Given widespread availability and low cost to patients, clinicians treating patients with chronic pain could consider using eHealth and mHealth interventions as part of a multidisciplinary pain treatment strategy.

Multi-Modal Signals for Analyzing Pain Responses to Thermal and Electrical Stimuli

Abstract: The assessment of pain relies mostly on methods that require a person to communicate. However, for people with cognitive and verbal impairments, existing methods are not sufficient as they lack reliability and validity. To approach this problem, recent research focuses on an objective pain assessment facilitated by parameters of responses derived from physiology, and video and audio signals. To develop reliable automated pain recognition systems, efforts have been made in creating multimodal databases in order to analyze pain and detect valid pain patterns. While the results are promising, they only focus on discriminating pain or pain intensities versus no pain. In order to advance this, research should also consider the quality and duration of pain as they provide additional valuable information for more advanced pain management. To complement existing databases and the analysis of pain regarding quality and length, this paper proposes a psychophysiological experiment to elicit, measure, and collect valid pain reactions. Participants are subjected to painful stimuli that differ in intensity (low, medium, and high), duration (5 s / 1 min), and modality (heat / electric pain) while audio, video (e.g., facial expressions, body gestures, facial skin temperature), and physiological signals (e.g., electrocardiogram [ECG], skin conductance level [SCL], facial electromyography [EMG], and EMG of M. trapezius) are being recorded. The study consists of a calibration phase to determine a subject’s individual pain range (from low to intolerable pain) and a stimulation phase in which pain stimuli, depending on the calibrated range, are applied. The obtained data may allow refining, improving, and evaluating automated recognition systems in terms of an objective pain assessment. For further development of such systems and to investigate pain reactions in more detail, additional pain modalities such as pressure, chemical, or cold pain should be included in future studies. Recorded data of this study will be released as the “X-ITE Pain Database”.

Cancer-Related Neuropathic Pain

Abstract: Neuropathic pain in cancer is common and debilitating. It is important to differentiate neuropathic pain from other cancer-related pains as it is associated with worse pain outcomes and requires different treatment strategies. This review summarises recent updates to pain classification, aetiology, pain assessment and current recommendations for treatment in patients with cancer-related neuropathic pain.

Insular and anterior cingulate cortex deep stimulation for central neuropathic pain: Disassembling the percept of pain

Abstract: Objective To compare the analgesic effects of stimulation of the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) or the posterior superior insula (PSI) against sham deep (d) repetitive (r) transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in patients with central neuropathic pain (CNP) after stroke or spinal cord injury in a randomized, double-blinded, sham-controlled, 3-arm parallel study. Methods Participants were randomly allocated into the active PSI-rTMS, ACC-rTMS, sham-PSI-rTMS, or sham-ACC-rTMS arms. Stimulations were performed for 12 weeks, and a comprehensive clinical and pain assessment, psychophysics, and cortical excitability measurements were performed at baseline and during treatment. The main outcome of the study was pain intensity (numeric rating scale [NRS]) after the last stimulation session. Results Ninety-eight patients (age 55.02 ± 12.13 years) completed the study. NRS score was not significantly different between groups at the end of the study. Active rTMS treatments had no significant effects on pain interference with daily activities, pain dimensions, neuropathic pain symptoms, mood, medication use, cortical excitability measurements, or quality of life. Heat pain threshold was significantly increased after treatment in the PSI-dTMS group from baseline (1.58, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.09–3.06]) compared to sham-dTMS (−1.02, 95% CI −2.10 to 0.04, p = 0.014), and ACC-dTMS caused a significant decrease in anxiety scores (−2.96, 95% CI −4.1 to −1.7]) compared to sham-dTMS (−0.78, 95% CI −1.9 to 0.3; p = 0.018). Conclusions ACC- and PSI-dTMS were not different from sham-dTMS for pain relief in CNP despite a significant antinociceptive effect after insular stimulation and anxiolytic effects of ACC-dTMS. These results showed that the different dimensions of pain can be modulated in humans noninvasively by directly stimulating deeper SNC cortical structures without necessarily affecting clinical pain per se. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01932905.

Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Pain Treatment: Evidence From Oregon Emergency Medical Services Agencies

Abstract: Background:Despite the critical role that Emergency Medical Services (EMS) provides in the health care system, racial/ethnic treatment disparities in EMS remain relatively unexamined.Objective:To investigate racial/ethnic treatment disparities in pain assessment and pain medication administration in

Controversies on the endoscopic and surgical management of pain in patients with chronic pancreatitis: pros and cons!

Abstract: Pain is the dominating symptom of chronic pancreatitis (CP) causing impairment of quality of life, decreased activity, unemployment and major healthcare costs.1 Opinions differ on the best strategy to treat CP-related pain. These differences are fuelled by the lack of a clear correlation between the severity of complaints and the presence and extent of morphological abnormalities, lack of a comprehensive pain assessment tools, deficiency in the knowledge about the natural course of CP and the presence of (changes in) both peripheral and central nervous system pain mechanisms. Analgesics are the cornerstone of pancreatic pain management, but when opioids are used, it may lead to dependency and opioid-induced hyperalgesia.2 When analgesic therapy fails, invasive treatments including endoscopic pancreatic duct clearance (with or without extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL)) or pancreatic duct stenting and surgery (resection and/or ductal decompression) are used. The rationale for invasive treatments is that reducing ductal pressure by restoring pancreatic juice flow and/or resecting an inflammatory pancreatic mass will result in pain relief. However, there is also a neuropathic basis for pain in most patients, for which invasive treatments may not be effective or even harmful. While there are many clinical studies that support invasive treatments, there is a paucity of high-quality randomised controlled trials (RCTs). As a result, the current guidelines for endoscopic and surgical treatments for painful CP are inconsistent and tend to reflect a specialty bias.3 For example, the German guidelines4 recommend surgery as the most effective treatment of pain, whereas the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy5 and the international evidence-based (HaPanEU) guidelines1 advice a ‘step-up approach’ incorporating both conservative, endoscopic and surgical treatment. These contradictions allow historic bias and a significant variation in clinical practice. Gut received a review article on the treatment of pain in CP that …

Pain assessment and pain treatment for community-dwelling people with dementia: A systematic review and narrative synthesis.

Abstract: Objectives To describe the current literature on pain assessment and pain treatment for community-dwelling people with dementia. Method A comprehensive systematic search of the literature with narrative synthesis was conducted. Eight major bibliographic databases were searched in October 2018. Titles, abstracts, and full-text articles were sequentially screened. Standardised data extraction and quality appraisal exercises were conducted. Results Thirty-two studies were included in the review, 11 reporting findings on pain assessment tools or methods and 27 reporting findings on treatments for pain. In regard to pain assessment, a large proportion of people with moderate to severe dementia were unable to complete a self-report pain instrument. Pain was more commonly reported by informal caregivers than the person with dementia themselves. Limited evidence was available for pain-focused behavioural observation assessment. In regard to pain treatment, paracetamol use was more common in community-dwelling people with dementia compared with people without dementia. However, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) were used less. For stronger analgesics, community-dwelling people with dementia were more likely to receive strong opioids (eg, fentanyl) than people without dementia. Conclusion This review identifies a dearth of high-quality studies exploring pain assessment and/or treatment for community-dwelling people with dementia, not least into non-pharmacological interventions. The consequences of this lack of evidence, given the current and projected prevalence of the disease, are very serious and require urgent redress. In the meantime, clinicians should adopt a patient- and caregiver-centred, multi-dimensional, longitudinal approach to pain assessment and pain treatment for this population.

Emergency nurses´ knowledge, attitude and perceived barriers regarding pain Management in Resource-Limited Settings: cross-sectional study.

Abstract: Pain is a common phenomenon among emergency patients which may lead to chronic pain conditions and alteration of physiological function. However, it is widely reported that proper pain assessment and management, which is often accomplished by adequately trained nurses reduce the suffering of patients. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess the emergency nurses´ knowledge, attitude and perceived barriers regarding pain management. A cross-sectional quantitative study design was applied to determine the nurses´ knowledge level, attitude and the perceived barriers related to pain management. Hundred twenty-six nurses from the emergency departments of seven referral hospitals of Eritrea participated in the study. Data were collected in August and September 2017. Both descriptive and inferential statistics were used to summarize and elaborate on the results. In general, the knowledge level and attitude of the emergency nurses was poor. The participants’ correct mean score was 49.5%. Nurses with Bachelor’s Degree had significantly higher knowledge and attitude level compared to the nurses at the Diploma and Certificate level of professional preparation (95% CI = 7.1–16.7 and 9.4–19.1; p < 0.001) respectively. Similarly, nurses who had previous training regarding pain scored significantly higher knowledge level compared to those without training (95% CI =1.82–8.99; p = 0.003). The highest perceived barriers to adequate pain management in emergency departments were measured to be overcrowding of the emergency department (2.57 ± 1.25), lack of protocols for pain assessment (2.45 ± 1.52), nursing workload (2.44 ± 1.29) and lack of pain assessment tools (2.43 ± 1.43). There was no significant difference in perceived barriers among nurses with different demographic characteristics. The emergency nurses’ knowledge and attitude regarding pain management were poor. Nurses with higher educational level and nurses with previous training scored significantly higher knowledge level. This indicates the need for nursing schools and the ministry of health to work together to educate nurses to a higher level of preparation for pain assessment and management.