Efficacy of interrupted cyclic treatment with prednisolone on cancer pain: a randomized crossover study

Background Interrupted cyclic treatment with a low oral dose of prednisolone combined with stepladder analgesics would reduce the pain scores in cancer patients with reported less side effects. Following ethical approval, 39 cancer patients were randomized to receive prednisolone 10 mg every other day or every 4th day for 4 successive weeks followed with tapering prednisolone by 2.5 mg every 4 days over 2 weeks after each interval, primary outcome visual analog score (VAS), and other secondary outcomes such as (A) patient demographics; (B) pain scores; brief pain inventory score (BPI), pain severity score (PSS), pain interference score (PIS), analgesia level score, pain level score (PLS), and pain management index (PMI)); and (C) patient safety (adverse effects) with interrupted cyclic treatment with low-dose prednisolone. Results Compared with baseline values, patients had statistically significant lower VAS and PSS pain scores at 14 and 28 days after starting the 2 days cyclic treatment with prednisolone. Patients had comparative VAS and PSS pain scores during the 4-day cyclic treatment with prednisolone. Compared with the 4-day cyclic treatment, patients in the 2-day cyclic treatment had significant statistically lower VAS pain scores at 28 days. Adverse effects showed no significant statistical differences during both study sequences. Conclusion Interrupted cyclic prednisolone 10 mg combined with stepladder analgesic regimen is effective and safe in terms on improved quality of analgesia for 28 days in cancer patients more when used every 2nd day than every 4th day with appetite improvement during both. Trial registration The study protocol was approved by the local Institutional Board Review Committee on 8-11-2019. The study was prospectively registered with the www.clinicaltrials.gov

EVALUATION OF THE QUALITY OF PAIN MANAGEMENT IN CANCER PATIENTS: STUDY OF 60 MOROCCAN PATIENTS AND LITERATURE REVIEW

Cancer is a chronic disease that affects patients quality of life, hence the need to evaluate the quality of care in its globality without forgetting cancer pain. This study aims to acknowledge the pain in cancer patients, evaluate it using international scales, and see to what extent this pain is managed in its totality. This is a prospective study to evaluate the quality of cancer pain management, 60 patients were included, 26 women and 34 men, with an average age of 52.2 years. The evaluation of pain concerned different cancer pathologies, according to the simple verbal scale and the visual analog scale, the majority of our patients (83.4%) had pain, 68.4% had moderate to severe pain, the use of level III analgesics occurred in 35% of patients. Among our sample 37% of cancer patients had negative pain management index scores, indicating inadequate analgesic treatment. This study shows that the management of cancer pain is still insufficient for reasons of organization and lack of information. This situation cannot be improved without the establishment of a global strategy for the management of cancer pain.

How do we measure the adequacy of cancer pain management? Testing the performance of 4 commonly used measures and steps towards measurement refinement

Although pain is the most common and disabling cancer symptom requiring management, the best index of cancer pain management adequacy is unknown. While the Pain Management Index is most commonly used, other indices have included relief, satisfaction, and pain intensity. We evaluated their correlations and agreement, compared their biopsychosocial correlates, and investigated whether they represented a single construct reflecting the adequacy of cancer pain management in 269 people with advanced cancer and pain. Despite moderate-to-severe average pain in 52.8% of participants, 85.1% had PMI scores suggesting adequate analgesia, pain relief was moderate and satisfaction was high. Correlations and agreement were low-to-moderate, suggesting low construct validity. Although the correlates of pain management adequacy were multidimensional, including lower pain interference, neuropathic and nociceptive pain, and catastrophizing, shorter cancer duration, and greater physical symptoms, no single index captured this multidimensionality. Principal component analysis demonstrated a single underlying construct, thus we constructed the Adequacy of Cancer Pain Management from factor loadings. It had somewhat better agreement, however correlates were limited to pain interference and neuropathic pain. This study demonstrates the psychometric shortcomings of commonly used indices. We provide suggestions for future research to improve measurement, a critical step in optimizing cancer pain management.

Comparison of Postoperative Pain Management Outcomes in the United States and China

To compare pain management outcomes in postoperative patients from an American hospital and a Chinese hospital. A convenience sample of 244 patients in the United States and 268 patients in China with similar surgical sites completed the American Pain Society Patient Outcome Questionnaire-Revised (APS-POQ-R) and the Pain Management Index (PMI) was calculated on their first postoperative day. Patients in the United States reported a higher score on the “perception of pain management” subscale of the APS-POQ-R and a higher proportion of adequate treatment as measured by the PMI (85.2% vs. 39.0%, p < .001). Patient education and degrees of pain relief predicted patient satisfaction with pain management (item in APS-POQ-R) in patients from both countries. A higher level of compliance with pain management guidelines has contributed to a higher level of perception in patients in the United States. Establishing procedure-specific protocols and clinical pathways may improve pain management outcomes for Chinese patients.

Factors related to pain management adequacy in patients receiving palliative care: data from a tertiary hospital in Indonesia

BACKGROUND Adequate pain management must be applied to improve the quality of life, particularly in patients receiving palliative care. Thus, this study aimed to determine the factors related to pain management adequacy in patients receiving palliative care. METHODS This cross-sectional study included all patients sent for consultation to the palliative care team complaining of pain in Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital, Jakarta, Indonesia from 2016 to 2018. All data such as gender, age, employment status, disease type, primary cancer location, pain intensity, analgesic drug treatment duration, and the presence of anxiety and depression were retrieved from medical records. Pain management adequacy was evaluated using the pain management index. Logistic regression included all variables with p<0.25 related to pain management adequacyin bivariate analysis. RESULTS Out of 175 patients with pain, 85.7% reported having adequate pain management. Pain was more adequately treated in patients with employment (p = 0.001), milder pain intensity (p<0.001), those using opioids (p<0.001), and those who did not experience anxiety (p = 0.05). Factors related to pain management adequacy were opioid use (OR = 3.23, 95% CI = 1.71–6.13) and milder pain (OR = 11.15, 95% CI = 3.89–31.99). CONCLUSIONS Most of the patients received adequate pain management which related to opioid use and milder pain.

Assessment for acute pain management in post-total knee replacement (TKR): a prospective cohort study in two Saudi Arabian medical centers

Background Acute pain in post joint replacement surgeries is common, which makes the management of acute pain following joint replacement surgeries to be very important. Thus, this study was conducted to evaluate acute pain management of post TKR surgeries. Results Patients with negative pain management index (PMI) scores were classified as receiving inadequate analgesic treatment for their pain. Zero PMI was the most frequent score among the others with 195 (80.6%). The rest were − 1 (11 (4.5%)), 1 (27 (11.2%)), and 2 (9 (3.7%)), respectively. Only 4.5% (11/242) patients have negative PMI score, which could be considered as inadequate pain management in which these patients received inadequate analgesic treatment. Conclusion Acute pain management in post-TKR surgeries in both medical centers achieved an acceptable level, and majority of patients received an adequate analgesia in post-TKR surgeries.

A PROSPECTIVE SURVEY OF APPROPRIATENESS OF PAIN PHARMACOTHERAPY MANAGEMENT IN POST-CESAREAN SECTION PATIENTS IN CIPTO MANGUNKUSUMO HOSPITAL

Objective: In this study, we sought to assess the pattern of analgesic usage, adequacy of pain management, side effects, and analgesic drug interactionsin the post-emergency cesarean surgery setting.Methods: This was a prospective observational study of 80 patients who underwent emergency cesarean surgery at the Obstetrics and GynecologyDepartment of the Rumah Sakit Umum Pusat Nasional Cipto Mangunkusumo (RSUPN-CM) between July 2015 and January 2016. Adequacy of painmanagement during the first 3 post-operative days was assessed using Pain Management Index. Relation between pain intensity during activities andrest with patient characteristic was assessed using Chi-squared test and Fischer’s exact test.Results: Nineteen patients (8.7%) were prescribed two types of nonsteroid anti-inflammatory drugs concomitantly, and 41.8% received inappropriateanalgesics at a lower frequency. Most patients experienced pain with numerical rating scale score >3 in the first 24 h post-surgery: 59 patients(73.75%) experienced pain during activities and 7 patients (8.75%) during rest.Conclusion: Post-emergency cesarean surgery pain management at RSUPN-CM was not optimal. Most patients did not receive adequate painmanagement in the first 24 h post-surgery.

Predictors and Prevalence of Pain and Its Management in Four Regional Cancer Hospitals in India

Purpose More than 1 million new occurrences of cancer are diagnosed in India annually. Among patients with cancer, pain is a common and persistent symptom of the disease and its treatment. However, few studies to date have evaluated the prevalence of pain and the adequacy of pain management in Indian hospitals. This cross-sectional study aimed to assess the prevalence and sociodemographic patterns of cancer pain and pain management among a sample of inpatients and newly registered outpatients at four large regional cancer centers in India. Methods A sample of 1,600 patients with cancer who were current inpatients or newly registered outpatients were recruited and administered a questionnaire that was based on the Brief Pain Inventory. The survey tool included questions on demographics, medical history, and extent of clinical pain experienced. In addition, a pain management index score was created to link the severity of cancer pain with medication prescribed to treat it. Results A total of 88% of patients reported pain in the past 7 days, and approximately 60% reported that their worst pain was severe. Several demographic and medical characteristics of the study population predicted severe pain, including the following: lower educational level, outpatient status, and debt incurred as a result of illness. A total of 67% of patients were inadequately treated with analgesics. Inadequate pain management was associated with both treatment hospital and patient type, and patients who reported debt as a result of their illness were more likely to have inadequate pain management. Conclusion A majority of Indian patients with cancer experience significant pain and receive inadequate pain management. Improvement of pain management for Indian patients with cancer is needed urgently.