Multidisciplinary pain treatment – Which patients do benefit?

2012 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 201-207 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tarja Heiskanen ◽  
Risto P. Roine ◽  
Eija Kalso
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Employment Status ◽  
Psychiatric Comorbidity ◽  
Pain Interference ◽  
Pain Clinic ◽  
Chronic Pain Patients ◽  
Patient Groups ◽  
Pain Patients

AbstractBackgroundThe prevalence of chronic non-malignant pain in developed countries is high, ranging from 14% to 50%. Patients with chronic pain are active users of health-care services and they report impaired health-related quality of life (HRQoL) when compared with the general population. Psychological distress has been identified as one of the risk factors for pain chronicity. Depression, anxiety and negative beliefs are associated with pain interference and perceived disability. Multidisciplinary pain management (MPM) aims to rehabilitating chronic pain patients by addressing both physical, psychological, social and occupational factors related to the pain problem. MPM programmes have been shown to be effective in reducing pain and improving function in patients with diverse chronic pain states. However, MPM programmes are often heterogeneous and predicting MPM treatment results in different patients groups may be difficult.MethodsThe present study examined changes in HRQoL after MPM in 439 patients treated at a multidisciplinary pain clinic using the 15D HRQoL questionnaire. The characteristics of the 100 patients with the greatest improvement and the 100 patients with the largest decrease in HRQoL were examined more closely (demographics, characteristics of pain, pain interference, psychiatric comorbidity, employment status, details of MPM) after answering a follow-up 15D questionnaire at three years after their MPM had ended.ResultDuring MPM, HRQoL was significantly improved in 45.6% of the 439 patients, decreased in 30.7% of the patients and did not change in 23.7% of the patients. Patient-related factors that predicted a better HRQoL among the 100 patients with good MPM outcome compared with the 100 patients with poor MPM outcome were higher education and better employment status. Age, gender, marital status, duration of pain, number of pain sites, pain intensity or pain interference at baseline did not differ between the patient groups. Patient expectations regarding MPM were similar. A tendency towards more psychiatric comorbidity in the non-responder group was seen. The duration of MPM in the two patient groups was similar, as well as the number of medications started, the variety of specialists seen and psychiatric counselling with supportive therapy included. More non-responder than responder patients had died during the three-year follow-up period, some of the deaths were related to substance abuse.Conclusions and ImplicationsHRQoL in chronic pain patients was significantly improved during MPM compared with the baseline. Pain duration of several years, multiple pain sites and neuropathic pain were not discerning factors between the responders and non-responders of the present study, implying that a positive change in HRQoL may be achieved by MPM even in these pain patients. In agreement with previous studies, factors predicting poor treatment outcome in the non-responder group of chronic pain patients were not treatment related. To further improve MPM outcome even in pain patients with risk factors for less benefit of treatment such as low education and poor general health, more individualized MPM approaches with emphasis on analysis and treatment of psychological symptoms and patient beliefs is essential.

Identifying characteristics of the most severely impaired chronic pain patients treated at a specialized inpatient pain clinic

2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 178-185 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eva-Britt Hysing ◽  
Lena Smith ◽  
Mans Thulin ◽  
Rolf Karlsten ◽  
Stephen Butler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Sick Leave ◽  
Physical Functioning ◽  
Psychiatric Comorbidity ◽  
Pain Clinic ◽  
Complex Nature ◽  
Pain Rating ◽  
Quality Register ◽  
Chronic Pain Patients ◽  
Pain Patients

AbstractBackground and aimsPatients suffering from chronic nonmalignant pain constitute a heterogeneous population in terms of clinical presentation and treatment results. Few data are available about what distinguishes different groups in this huge population of patients with chronic persistent pain (CPP). A subgroup that is poorly studied, consists of the most severely impaired chronic pain patients. At the Uppsala University Hospital Pain Clinic, there is a specialized department accepting the most complex patients for rehabilitation. In the endeavour to improve and evaluate treatment for this subgroup, a better understanding of the complex nature of the illness is essential. This prospective study aimed to describe the characteristics of this subgroup of patients with CPP.MethodsSeventy-two consecutive patients enrolled in the Uppsala programme were evaluated. We collected data on demographics, type of pain and experienced symptoms other than pain using a checklist of 41 possible symptoms. Psychiatric comorbidity was assessed by a psychiatrist using a structured clinical interview. Quality of life (QoL), pain rating and medication/drug/alcohol usage were measured by validated questionnaires: SF-36, NRS, DUDIT and AUDIT. Concerning physical functioning and sick leave, a comparison was made with data from the Swedish Quality Register Registry for pain rehabilitation (SQRP).ResultsThe cohort consisted of 61% women and the average age was 45 (range 20-70) years. For this cohort, 74% reported being on sick leave or disability-pension. In the SQRP 59% were on sick leave at the time they entered the rehabilitation programmes [1]. On average, the study-population reported 22 symptoms other than pain, to be at a high rate of severity. Patients treated in conventional pain-rehabilitation programmes reported a mean of 10 symptoms in average. Symptoms reported with the highest frequency (>80%), were lethargy, tiredness, headache and difficulties concentrating. Seventy- six percent were diagnosed with a psychiatric disorder. Sixty-nine fulfilled the criteria for depression or depression/anxiety disorder despite that most (65%) were treated with psychotropic medication. Alcohol/drug abuse was minimal. Seventy-one percent were on opioids but the doses were moderate (<100 mg) MEq. The pain rating was ≥7 (out of a maximum of 10) for 60% of the patients.ConclusionThis study describes what makes the subgroup of pain patients most affected by their pain special according to associated factors and comorbidity We found that they were distinguished by a high degree of psychiatric comorbidity, low physical functioning and extreme levels of symptom preoccupation/hypervigilance. Many severe symptoms additional to pain (e.g. depression/anxiety, tiredness, disturbed sleep, lack of concentration, constipation) were reported. The group seems hypervigilant, overwhelmed with a multitude of different symptoms on a high severity level.ImplicationsWhen treating this complex group, the expressions of the illness can act as obstacles to achieve successful treatment outcomes. The study provides evidence based information, for a better understanding of the needs concerning these pain patients. Our result indicates that parallel assessment and treatment of psychiatric comorbidities and sleep disorders combined with traditional rehabilitation, i.e. physical activation and cognitive reorganization are imperative for improved outcomes.

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.

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 Empathic Accuracy in Chronic Pain: Exploring Patient and Informal Caregiver Differences and Their Personality Correlates

Medicina ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 55 (9) ◽  
pp. 539
Author(s):  
Suso-Ribera ◽  
Martínez-Borba ◽  
Viciano ◽  
Cano-García ◽  
García-Palacios
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Social Factors ◽  
Informal Caregiver ◽  
Informal Caregivers ◽  
Empathic Accuracy ◽  
Pain Interference ◽  
Pain Clinic ◽  
Accurate Estimation ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Pain Patients

Background and objectives: Social factors have demonstrated to affect pain intensity and quality of life of pain patients, such as social support or the attitudes and responses of the main informal caregiver. Similarly, pain has negative consequences on the patient’s social environment. However, it is still rare to include social factors in pain research and treatment. This study compares patient and caregivers’ accuracy, as well as explores personality and health correlates of empathic accuracy in patients and caregivers. Materials and Methods: The study comprised 292 chronic pain patients from the Pain Clinic of the Vall d’Hebron Hospital in Spain (main age = 59.4 years; 66.8% females) and their main informal caregivers (main age = 53.5 years; 51.0% females; 68.5% couples). Results: Patients were relatively inaccurate at estimating the interference of pain on their counterparts (t = 2.16; p = 0.032), while informal caregivers estimated well the patient’s status (all differences p > 0.05). Empathic accuracy on patient and caregiver status did not differ across types of relationship (i.e., couple or other; all differences p > 0.05). Sex differences in estimation only occurred for disagreement in pain severity, with female caregivers showing higher overestimation (t = 2.18; p = 0.030). Patients’ health status and caregivers’ personality were significant correlates of empathic accuracy. Overall, estimation was poorer when patients presented higher physical functioning. Similarly, caregiver had more difficulties in estimating the patient’s pain interference as patient general and mental health increased (r = 0.16, p = 0.008, and r = 0.15, p = 0.009, respectively). Caregiver openness was linked to a more accurate estimation of a patient’s status (r = 0.20, p < 0.001), while caregiver agreeableness was related to a patient’s greater accuracy of their caregivers’ pain interference (r = 0.15, p = 0.009). Conclusions: Patients poorly estimate the impact of their illness compared to caregivers, regardless of their relationship. Some personality characteristics in the caregiver and health outcomes in the patient are associated with empathic inaccuracy, which should guide clinicians when selecting who requires more active training on empathy in pain settings.

Codetron in Rehabilitation of Chronic Pain Patients

1989 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 54-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angelica Fargas-Babjak
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Modern Medicine ◽  
Pain Clinic ◽  
The Novel ◽  
Technological Changes ◽  
Electrical Nerve Stimulation ◽  
Chronic Pain Patients ◽  
Pain Patients

Acupuncture is one of the oldest healing methods which is used in traditional medicine. in modern medicine we are witnessing a renaissance of this ancient treatment applied mainly in the management of chronic pain. A number of modern technological changes are being applied to replace, or modify, the classical needle treatment Among many of the modalities used at present are light, in the form of laser, and electrical stimulation. CODETRON TENS, the novel addition to Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS), has been evaluated in a clinical trial, over a two year period, in a multidisciplinary pain clinic on patients who came for acupuncture therapy. Indications, effectiveness and experiences with this form of treatment are presented.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document