scholarly journals Management of chronic pain

1997 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 86-93 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen P. Tyrer
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Acute Treatment ◽  
Pain Treatment ◽  
Medical Condition ◽  
Washington State ◽  
Pain Clinic ◽  
Pain Clinics ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Treatment Facilities ◽  
The Many

Until 50 years ago chronic pain was not considered to be a medical condition that required special evaluation and treatment facilities. Pain was considered to be an indicator of tissue damage and appropriate medical or surgical treatment was prescribed for this. The many patients who had continuing pain because of the results of disease or trauma or because acute treatment was unable to relieve the condition were not seen as suffering from a recognised pathological entity. It was not until a doctor, Sicilian-born John J. Bonica, had to pay his debts as a medical student through wrestling professionally, and later suffered persistent pain as a result, that chronic pain became a recognised condition in its own right. Bonica started a pain clinic in Tacoma, Washington State, in 1949 and wrote the first textbook on pain treatment, The Management of Pain, in 1953. There are now 2000–3000 pain clinics in the USA and almost 5000 worldwide.

scholarly journals What Do the Parents of Children Who Have Chronic Pain Expect from Their First Visit to a Pediatric Chronic Pain Clinic?

2010 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 158-162 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathy Reid ◽  
Janice Lander ◽  
Shannon Scott ◽  
Bruce Dick
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Pain Treatment ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Pain Clinic ◽  
Treatment Modalities ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Treatment Needs ◽  
Pediatric Chronic Pain ◽  
Pain Clinics

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain in childhood is increasingly recognized as a significant clinical problem. Best-practice management of pediatric chronic pain in a multidisciplinary pain clinic involves a variety of treatment modalities. It is important that parents of children treated in these settings understand the different treatment options available for their children. By involving parents more effectively, care providers may more efficiently address unmet treatment needs and improve tailoring of treatment programs aimed at increasing function, reducing pain-related disability and improving quality of life.OBJECTIVES: To explore the expectations held by parents for their first visit to a pediatric multidisciplinary pain clinic.METHODS: Fourteen parents completed a paper-based survey exploring their expectations immediately before their first visit to a multidisciplinary pediatric pain clinic in a tertiary care children’s hospital.RESULTS: Responses from parents suggest a clear desire for information about the causes of their child’s pain, treatment options available at the pain clinic, effective strategies to enhance children’s ability to cope with pain, and the effects of pain on both body and mood. Most parents rated the various treatment options as important for their child. All parents indicated it was very important to have the pain team ‘be there’ for them.CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate that parents want more information about chronic pain and treatment options. Pediatric chronic pain clinics have the ability to assist children with chronic pain and their families considerably by providing information about chronic pain and the various treatment options available to them.

scholarly journals Patients with Chronic Pain Prefer Maintenance of Pain Treatment Despite COVID-19 Pandemic Restrictions

2021 ◽  
pp. 165-173
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Pain Therapy ◽  
Pain Treatment ◽  
Mental Illnesses ◽  
Pain Clinic ◽  
Pain Clinics ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Hygiene Measures ◽  
Short Period ◽  
The Impact

BACKGROUND: Worldwide, the COVID-19 pandemic has a significant impact on daily life. First studies describe a negative impact of pandemic stressors even on individuals without previous mental illnesses. The home lockdown and the shutdown of pain clinics make it difficult for all patients to get the healthcare they need. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate to what extent patients with chronic pain felt affected by the pandemic and its consequences on pain treatments, focussing on the beginning of the outbreak. STUDY DESIGN: A prospective noninterventional study. SETTING: Medical University Center . METHODS: One-hundred and forty-nine patients, suffering from chronic pain, treated at a large German interdisciplinary pain center, were studied over a period of 2 months at the beginning of the pandemic. Data from patient charts and questionnaires were evaluated. Patients were asked about postponements or cancellations of pain therapy, the possible effect on pain levels, depression, anxiety and stress, and the impact of intensified hygiene measures. Results were compared to those from standardized and validated questionnaires from the same patients (German version of the depression, anxiety, and stress scale = DASS) at the time of the first contact in the pain clinic. RESULTS: Eighty-four (56.4%) patients reported cancelled or postponed treatments during the pandemic. Those chronic pain patients with delayed or cancelled treatments reported significantly more pain and psychological distress. The delay or discontinuation of treatments resulted in a deterioration of symptoms. From the patients’ point of view this deterioration was unrelated to the timing of treatment and not secondary to increased hygiene measures. In both groups, patients showed a significant amelioration of the DASS values compared to the values they had at the beginning of treatment, despite the negative effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on care structures. The majority of the patients do not think that the quality of pain treatment was significantly affected by the intensified hygiene requirements. LIMITATIONS: The limitations of the study are the small number of patients because of the limitation to a short period of time at the beginning of the pandemic and the return rate of 40.2% of the study consents. CONCLUSIONS: Even in the event of a pandemic-related restriction of the care structures, patients with chronic pain benefit from pain therapy. Limitations such as the increased hygiene measures caused by the pandemic were not considered detrimental to the therapeutic measures. KEY WORDS: COVID-19 pandemic, hygiene measures, chronic pain, anxiety, depression, stress

scholarly journals Sublingual Buprenorphine/Naloxone and Multi-Modal Management for High-Risk Chronic Pain Patients

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 973
Author(s):  
Shane Kaski ◽  
Patrick Marshalek ◽  
Jeremy Herschler ◽  
Sijin Wen ◽  
Wanhong Zheng
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Pain ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Pain Score ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Pain Treatment ◽  
Pain Clinic ◽  
Sublingual Buprenorphine ◽  
Significant Downward Trend ◽  
Chronic Pain Patients ◽  
Pain Patients

Patients with chronic pain managed with opioid medications are at high risk for opioid overuse or misuse. West Virginia University (WVU) established a High-Risk Pain Clinic to use sublingual buprenorphine/naloxone (bup/nal) plus a multimodal approach to help chronic pain patients with history of Substance Use Disorder (SUD) or aberrant drug-related behavior. The objective of this study was to report overall retention rates and indicators of efficacy in pain control from approximately six years of High-Risk Pain Clinic data. A retrospective chart review was conducted for a total of 78 patients who enrolled in the High-Risk Pain Clinic between 2014 and 2020. Data gathered include psychiatric diagnoses, prescribed medications, pain score, buprenorphine/naloxone dosing, time in clinic, and reason for dismissal. A linear mixed effects model was used to assess the pain score from the Defense and Veterans Pain Rating Scale (DVPRS) and daily bup/nal dose across time. The overall retention of the High-Risk Pain Clinic was 41%. The mean pain score demonstrated a significant downward trend across treatment time (p < 0.001), while the opposite trend was seen with buprenorphine dose (p < 0.001). With the benefit of six years of observation, this study supports buprenorphine/naloxone as a safe and efficacious component of comprehensive chronic pain treatment in patients with SUD or high-risk of opioid overuse or misuse.

Pain treatment and prevention in pediatric palliative care

2021 ◽  
pp. 292-311
Author(s):  
Stefan J. Friedrichsdorf
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Palliative Care ◽  
Visceral Pain ◽  
Pain Treatment ◽  
Symptom Control ◽  
Pediatric Palliative Care ◽  
Serious Illness ◽  
Psychological Therapies ◽  
Total Pain ◽  
The Usa

Annually, at least 21 million children could benefit from pediatric palliative care (PPC) and 8 million would need specialized PPC services. In the USA alone, more than 40,000 children aged 0–19 years die annually; 55% of them are infants younger than 1 year of age. Pain is common, under-recognized, and under-treated, especially in children with progressive neurodegenerative and chromosomal conditions with central nervous system impairment. Unrelieved pain is also common in children with advanced serious illness during the end-of-life period, and, when treated, the therapy is commonly ineffective. Treating pain in children with serious illness is not profoundly different than advanced pain management for children with complex acute conditions or diseases such as major trauma, burns, cancer, or those with sickle cell disease in vaso-occlusive crisis. It is important to appreciate that children with serious illness are more likely to simultaneously suffer from acute pain, neuropathic pain, visceral pain, total pain, and chronic pain. As such, multimodal analgesic (i.e., multiple agents, interventions, rehabilitation, psychological modalities, and integrative (“nonpharmacologic,” e.g., behavioral, physiological, and psychological) therapies that act synergistically for more effective pediatric pain and symptom control with fewer side effects than a single analgesic or modality must be employed. Opioids, such as morphine, fentanyl, hydromorphone, oxycodone, and methadone, remain the mainstay medications to effectively treat pain in children with serious illness. However, medications alone are often insufficient for optimal pain control. In fact, the paradigm shift away from “medications only” toward offering “multimodal analgesia” to children with serious illness experiencing pain, including addressing chronic pain/primary pain disorders and total pain has become a “game changer” in advancing PPC to ensure that patients can live as long as possible, as well as possible.

scholarly journals Pain Characteristics and Demographics of Patients Attending a University-Affiliated Pain Clinic in Toronto, Ontario

2007 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 93-99 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angela Mailis-Gagnon ◽  
Balaji Yegneswaran ◽  
SF Lakha ◽  
Keith Nicholson ◽  
Amanda J Steiman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Pain Clinic ◽  
Pain Clinics ◽  
Chronic Pain Patients ◽  
Musculoskeletal Problems ◽  
Pain Duration ◽  
Study Population ◽  
Age Range ◽  
Pain Patients

BACKGROUND: Pain clinics tend to see more complex chronic pain patients than primary care settings, but the types of patients seen may differ among practices.OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present observational study was to describe the pain and demographic characteristics of patients attending a university-affiliated tertiary care pain clinic in Toronto, Ontario.METHODS: Data were collected on 1242 consecutive new patients seen over a three-year period at the Comprehensive Pain Program in central Toronto.RESULTS: Musculoskeletal problems affecting large joints and the spine were the predominant cause of pain (more prevalent in women), followed by neuropathic disorders (more prevalent in men) in patients with recognizable physical pathology. The most affected age group was in the 35- to 49-year age range, with a mean pain duration of 7.8 years before the consultation. While 77% of the Comprehensive Pain Program patients had relevant and detectable physical pathology for pain complaints, three-quarters of the overall study population also had significant associated psychological or psychiatric comorbidity. Women, in general, attended the pain clinic in greater numbers and had less apparent physical pathology than men. Finally, less than one in five patients was employed at the time of referral.CONCLUSIONS: The relevance of the data in relation to other pain clinics is discussed, as well as waiting lists and other barriers faced by chronic pain patients, pain practitioners and pain facilities in Ontario and Canada.

scholarly journals The Oslo University Hospital Pain Registry: development of a digital chronic pain registry and baseline data from 1,712 patients

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 365-373 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lars-Petter Granan ◽  
Silje Endresen Reme ◽  
Henrik Børsting Jacobsen ◽  
Audun Stubhaug ◽  
Tone Marte Ljoså
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Real World ◽  
Self Efficacy ◽  
Pain Catastrophizing ◽  
Baseline Data ◽  
University Hospital ◽  
Pain Clinic ◽  
General Function ◽  
Pain Clinics ◽  
Chronic Pain Conditions

Abstract Background and aims Chronic pain is a leading cause to years lived with disability worldwide. However, few of the interventions used in pain medicine have proven efficacy, and evidence from the existing studies may not be valid for the general pain population. Therefore, it is of utmost need that we describe chronic pain conditions in their most relevant aspects, their various guises, as well as the real world outcomes of our clinical interventions. The most obvious and crude way to make these assessments are through large registries where patient characteristics, treatment characteristics (including but not limited to what, when, how often and by whom), treatment outcomes and patient outcomes are scrutinized and recorded. Methods and results This article describes in detail the design and baseline data of the comprehensive Oslo University Hospital Pain Registry (OPR). OPR is the local registry of the largest university and interdisciplinary outpatient pain clinic in Norway. Data registration started in October 2015, and approximately 1,000 patients are assessed and treated at the clinic each year. During the first 2 years of running the OPR (through September 2017), a total of 1,712 patient baseline reports were recorded from 2,001 patients. Clinicians enter data about relevant treatments and interventions, while patients provide self-reported data on aspects related to pain and pain management. The patients complete an electronic registration immediately before their first consultation at the outpatient pain clinic. The baseline questions of the OPR cover: Basic demographics; The Modified Oswestry Disability Index to assess general function; A pain drawing to assess pain location; Questions regarding the temporal aspects of pain; Six 0–10 Numeric Rating Scales to assess pain intensity and bothersomeness; The EQ-5D-5L to measure health-related quality of life; The Hopkins Symptom Check List-25 to assess psychological distress; A single question about self-rated health; The general self-efficacy scale to assess the patient’s perceived self-efficacy; The Bodily Distress Syndrome checklist to assess functional disorders; The Injustice Experience Questionnaire to assess whether the patients experience injustice; Chalder Fatigue Questionnaire to assess fatigue; The Insomnia Severity Index to assesses the levels of insomnia symptoms; The Pain Catastrophizing Scale to measure pain catastrophizing and exaggerated negative orientation toward pain stimuli and pain experience; And the SF36v2 to assess patients’ self-report of generic health and wellbeing. The baseline data show that chronic pain patients have a high degree of negative impact in all aspects of their lives. Conclusions and implications The OPR is the most comprehensive pain registry for multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary outpatient pain clinics in Norway. Detailed design of the registry and key baseline data are presented. Registries are of great value in that they enable real world effectiveness outcomes for patients with chronic pain conditions. The OPR can thus serve as a model for similar initiatives elsewhere. The OPR cohort may also serve as a historical control in future studies, both with experimental and observational design.

scholarly journals Systematic Review of Multidisciplinary Chronic Pain Treatment Facilities

2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 ◽  
pp. 1-19 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samantha R. Fashler ◽  
Lynn K. Cooper ◽  
Eric D. Oosenbrug ◽  
Lindsay C. Burns ◽  
Shima Razavi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Pain Treatment ◽  
Wait Times ◽  
Original Research ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Treatment Facility ◽  
Research Survey ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Treatment Facilities ◽  
Chronic Pain Treatment

This study reviewed the published literature evaluating multidisciplinary chronic pain treatment facilities to provide an overview of their availability, caseload, wait times, and facility characteristics. A systematic literature review was conducted using PRISMA guidelines following a search of MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL databases. Inclusion criteria stipulated that studies be original research, survey more than one pain treatment facility directly, and describe a range of available treatments. Fourteen articles satisfied inclusion criteria. Results showed little consistency in the research design used to describe pain treatment facilities. Availability of pain treatment facilities was scarce and the reported caseloads and wait times were generally high. A wide range of medical, physical, and psychological pain treatments were available. Most studies reported findings on the percentage of practitioners in different health care professions employed. Future studies should consider using more comprehensive search strategies to survey facilities, improving clarity on what is considered to be a pain treatment facility, and reporting on a consistent set of variables to provide a clear summary of the status of pain treatment facilities. This review highlights important information for policymakers on the scope, demand, and accessibility of pain treatment facilities.

Treatment of Chronic Pain

2021 ◽  
pp. 141-156
Author(s):  
John D. Otis
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Gold Standard ◽  
Subjective Experience ◽  
Pain Treatment ◽  
Psychological Treatment ◽  
Negative Mood ◽  
Cognitive Behavioral ◽  
Psychological Treatments ◽  
Domains Of Life ◽  
The Many

Chronic pain is a highly prevalent condition that causes substantial impairment in many domains of life. Recent advances in pain research have elucidated the many biological, psychological, and social factors that can contribute to and impact the subjective experience of pain. In addition to treating patients using medications to manage pain, psychological treatments have now been developed and tested and found to significantly improve the severity of pain and the negative mood that often accompanies pain, as well as disability and impairment. Cognitive behavioral approaches are now considered the “gold standard” psychological treatment for pain. To maximize their efficacy, however, these treatments are not implemented rigidly; rather, they are tailored to the particular needs of the patient. This chapter covers the essential treatment components for pain and offers therapists ideas for effectively tailoring treatment to individual patients, so that pain treatment can be implemented flexibly, but with fidelity.

Assessment and treatment at a pain clinic: A one-year follow-up of patients with chronic pain

2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 233-242 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Hållstam ◽  
Monika Löfgren ◽  
Lina Benson ◽  
Christer Svensén ◽  
Britt-Marie Stålnacke
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Pain Clinic ◽  
Health Related Quality ◽  
Pain Clinics ◽  
Related Quality ◽  
Health Related ◽  
One Year

AbstractBackground and aimsPain is one of the most common reasons for patients to seek primary health care. Pain relief is likely to be achieved for patients suffering from acute pain, but for individuals with chronic pain it is more likely that the condition will persist. These patients have the option of being referred to specialised pain clinics. However, the complexity surrounding chronic pain patients is not well studied in these settings. This study aimed to describe patients with chronic pain referred to a pain clinic by using the information submitted during their first visit and one year later and also to identify associations between baseline characteristics and improvements in health-related quality of life in the follow-up.MethodsThis was a longitudinal observational study of a sample consisting of 318 patients referred to a pain clinic. One group of patients containing 271 individuals (median age 48, 64% females) was assessed and received conventional pain treatment (CPT group) and a second group of 47 patients (median age 53, 64% females) was assessed by a pain specialist and referred back to their physician with a treatment recommendation (assessment only, AO group). Patient-reported outcome measures in health-related quality of life (EQ-5D), pain intensity (VAS), mental health (HADS), insomnia (ISI), pain-related disability (PDI), kinesiophobia (TSK) and sense of coherence (SOC) were collected at the first visit and one year later.ResultsAt baseline, the CPT group reported a low EQ-5D Index (median (md) 0.157) and EQVAS (md 40) as well as considerable high, current pain intensity VAS (md 58), HADS anxiety (md 8), ISI (md 17), PDI (md 36) and TSK (md 39). The AO group showed similar problems (no significant differences compared to the CPT group), except for ISI, where the AO group reported less severe problems. At the one-year follow-up, the CPT group had a statistically significant improvement in EQ-5D, VAS, ISI, PDI and TSK. In the AO group no significant changes were observed. In the CPT group there was an association between a high ISI level at baseline and an improved EQ-5D Index in the follow-up.ConclusionsThe study describes rarely explored groups of patients with chronic pain at a pain clinic. Severe pain problems were present in both groups at their first visit. A statistically significant improvement could be seen in the group that was conventionally treated while this was not the case among those subjects who were assessed and referred. The results imply, that relatively limited treatment strategies were helpful for the patients’ health-related quality of life. Despite these improvements, the patients were not fully recovered, pointing to the chronicity of pain conditions and the need of support for many patients.ImplicationsIncreased knowledge about assessment, selection and treatment at pain clinics is important to improve the quality of the work performed at these clinics. Despite limited resources, further efforts should be made to collect comparable, valid data on a regular base from pain clinics in order to develop recommendation models.

Patients with chronic pain: One-year follow-up of a multimodal rehabilitation programme at a pain clinic

2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 36-42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Hållstam ◽  
Monika Löfgren ◽  
Christer Svensén ◽  
Britt-Marie Stålnacke
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Pain Clinic ◽  
Pain Clinics ◽  
Related Quality ◽  
Health Related ◽  
One Year ◽  
Eq Vas

AbstractBackground and aimsMultimodal rehabilitation (MMR) programmes, including, physical training, educational and psychological interventions by an interdisciplinary team are found to be more successful for patients with disabling chronic pain compared with less comprehensive treatments. MMR programmes are based on the biopsychosocial model and the goal is usually to improve function, quality of life and facilitate and enable return to work. As pain clinics traditionally offer conventional medical pain treatment, there is limited knowledge about MMR given in this context. The aim of our study was to describe characteristics of patients with chronic pain, treated with a MMR programme at a conventional pain clinic, to evaluate patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) from start to one year after, and to study possibly associated factors for the improvement of health-related quality of life after one year.MethodsA prospective, observational study with a one-year follow-up was performed.SubjectsA total of 42 individuals (38 females, age 44.0 ± 12.3 years and 4 men age 40 ± 8.5 years) with different pain diagnoses were included. After a team assessment, the patients began a programme that lasted about three months. The MMR programme contained coordinated, individually adapted treatments administered individually or in groups, and was based on cognitive behavioural principles. Questionnaires regarding health-related quality of life (HRQoL) (EQ-5D), insomnia (ISI), mental health (HADS), painrelated disability (PDI), kinesiophobia (TSK), current pain intensity (VAS) and sense of coherence (SOC) were used at the start of the MMR and at follow-up. Demographic data were collected from the patient records.ResultsThe PROM at baseline showed substantial pain problems with low HRQoL (EQ-5D index of 0.1 ± 0.282, and EQ VAS of 32.67 ± 20.1), moderate insomnia (ISI 18.95 ± 6.7), doubtful cases of depression and anxiety (HADS-depression 9.35 ± 4.1 and HADS-anxiety 9.78 ± 3.95), presence of pain-related disability (PDI 39.48 ±12.64), kinesiophobia (TSK 40.8 ± 9.8), as well as moderate current pain (VAS 61.31 ± 20.4). The sense of coherence was weak (SOC of 51.37 ± 14). At one-year follow-up, significant (p ≥ 0.05) improvement occurred on the EQ-5D index, EQ VAS, ISI, PDI and TSK. In the logistic regression analysis, no significant associations could be identified.ConclusionsMMR for patients with complex pain problems can be a successful treatment alternative at conventional pain clinics.ImplicationsSince access to rehabilitation clinics in Sweden may be limited, the availability of MMR can increase by providing this type of intervention in pain clinics. Increased knowledge of MMR in different settings can also contribute to increased understanding and collaboration between pain clinics and rehabilitation units.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document