Assessment of adequacy of pain management in advance cancer patients.

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. e283-e287
Author(s):  
Harminder Singh ◽  
Raja Banipal
Keyword(s):  
Pain Management ◽  
Cancer Pain ◽  
Dose Titration ◽  
Cancer Type ◽  
Cancer Pain Management ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Pain Management Index ◽  
Cancer Types ◽  
New Formulation

e283 Background: Cancer prevalence in India is estimated around 2.0-2.5 million, 0.7- 0.8 million new cases identified every year, and cancer deaths reported per year is 0.4-0.5 Million. The objective of this study was to estimation of the prevalence of inadequate cancer pain management in patients with advanced cancer. Methods: Adequacy of pain management, that is Pain Management Index calculated for each patient. It is simple indexes which usually indicate a connection of the reported level of pain to the potency of the analgesics prescribed Results: 211 patients were recruited with most prevalent cancer type was genitourinary, diagnosed in 28.7% patients, followed by breast cancer 23.1% and head & neck cancer 20.3%. Among 211 patients with cancer, 76.85% patients had inadequate pain management and 23.14% had better control of pain. Association of inadequacy of pain were done with age, gender, occupation, family history, duration and cancer types, signification relation was observed with age group and analgesic use. (See table.) Conclusions: Our inadequate pain management prevalence rate of about 78% was far too high so this study will highlight the importance of true status of cancer pain management. It also emphasized that systematic recording of pain intensity and follow up further enhance the entire pain management mechanism including dose titration to change of new formulation. [Table: see text]

scholarly journals Assessment of Adequacy of Pain Management and Analgesic Use in Patients With Advanced Cancer Using the Brief Pain Inventory and Pain Management Index Calculation

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 235-241 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harminder Singh ◽  
Raja Paramjeet Singh Banipal ◽  
Baltej Singh
Keyword(s):  
Pain Management ◽  
Cancer Pain ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
Brief Pain Inventory ◽  
Cancer Type ◽  
Cancer Pain Management ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Pain Management Index ◽  
Pain Symptoms

Purpose The objective of this cross-sectional, noninterventional, 6-month observational study was to assess the adequacy of pain management in patients with cancer admitted to the Oncology Department of Guru Gobind Singh Medical College in Faridkot, India. Methods and Materials A total of 348 patients with cancer were recruited for evaluation of the prevalence of inadequate cancer pain management using the Brief Pain Inventory Pain Management Index. Results The current study included 127 males (36.5%) and 221 females (63.5%). The most prevalent cancer type was genitourinary; 268 patients (77%) had inadequately managed pain. A significant correlation was observed between poorly managed pain and age groups, analgesic used, and body mass index. Conclusion Our observation of inadequate pain management among 77% of patients indicates that pain management was insufficient in three quarters of the patients in this study. Accumulating data regarding the inadequacy of cancer pain management is crucial to improve symptom management. Better management of pain not only alleviates pain symptoms but also increases the quality of life for patients with cancer.

Opioid Rotation for Toxicity Reduction (DRAFT)

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Cecilia Tenorio ◽  
Akhila Reddy
Keyword(s):  
Pain Management ◽  
Cancer Pain ◽  
Clinical Case ◽  
Cancer Pain Management ◽  
Opioid Rotation ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Daily Dose ◽  
Study Intervention ◽  
Morphine Equivalent

This chapter discusses the de Stoutz et al. retrospective review of patients with cancer pain who developed dose-limiting toxicities and underwent opioid rotation that resulted in improvement of symptoms related to opioid induced neurotoxicity, uncontrolled pain, and reduction in morphine equivalent daily dose. This study is the first to establish that opioid rotation, which is substituting one opioid with another using established equianalgesic conversion ratios, is a valuable tool in cancer pain management. This chapter describes the basics of the study, including funding, year study began, year study was published, study location, who was studied, who was excluded, how many patients, study design, study intervention, follow-up, endpoints, results, and criticism and limitations. The chapter briefly reviews other relevant studies and information, gives a summary and discusses implications, and concludes with a relevant clinical case.

A physician's practice, attitude and approach for the management of palliative care for cancer.

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (29_suppl) ◽  
pp. 112-112
Author(s):  
Shijian Feng ◽  
Qiongwen Zhang ◽  
Chunhua Yu ◽  
Huashan Shi ◽  
Wenxiu Yao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pain Management ◽  
Cancer Pain ◽  
Professional Education ◽  
Physician Education ◽  
Dose Titration ◽  
Categorical Variables ◽  
Cancer Pain Management ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Knowledge Of Cancer ◽  
Chi Square Analysis

112 Background: Pain is the most frequent and persistent symptom experienced by cancer patients. Thus, exploring how to achieve the best outcome of cancer pain management in China is clearly extremely important. Our study focuses on the Chinese physicians' current clinical practice, attitudes, toward and barriers to opioid use, and knowledge of cancer pain management. Methods: A face to face survey include 23 items was designed and conducted to the doctors working with cancer pain managements (oncologists, internists, hematologists, et al) responsible for the care of patients with cancer in 11 tertiary hospitals in China. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize the total sample and for multiple choice questions and each item. Chi-square analysis was used to examine the difference between categorical variables. Results: 500 questionnaires were received out of 550. Most (62.2%) physicians assessed patients’ cancer pain every day, but 85.5% never or occasionally treated patients’ cancer pain together with psychologists. Most respondents appreciated that > 50% of patients with cancer experience severe chronic pain warranting analgesic therapy (73.5%), and that this therapy could control pain adequately in > 50% of patients (77.2%). More than half of physicians indicated that opioid dose titration in patients with poor pain control and assessment of the cause and severity of pain were urgently needed knowledge for cancer pain management. A majority (65.0%) of physicians responded incorrectly (60.0% agreed and 5.0% had no opinion) that they would increase the dosage of a potent opioid and administer it every 4 h as needed (q4h PRN). Inadequate assessment of pain and pain management (63.0%), patients' reluctance to take opioids (62.2%), and inadequate staff knowledge of pain management (61.4%) were the three most frequently barriers to physicians’ pain management. Conclusions: Our results revealed that physician education in cancer pain management in China does not currently provide the necessary levels of knowledge and skills. Therefore, effective strategies and professional education are still needed to encourage physicians’ concern with, experience in, and knowledge of cancer pain management in China.

Impact of parenteral opioid shortage on opioid prescriptions among patients seen by the palliative care team of a comprehensive cancer center.

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (34_suppl) ◽  
pp. 201-201
Author(s):  
Ali Haider ◽  
Yu Qian ◽  
Zhanni Lu ◽  
Syed Mussadiq Ali Akbar Naqvi ◽  
Amy Zhuang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Pain Management ◽  
Cancer Pain ◽  
Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Type ◽  
Cancer Pain Management ◽  
Before And After ◽  
The Impact

201 Background: Recent parenteral opioid shortage (POS) has the potential to impact cancer pain management in hospitalized patients. This study aims to compare changes in the opioid prescriptions by the inpatient palliative care (PC) team before and after the institution first reported the POS. Methods: We reviewed and compared the electronic health records of 386 consecutive eligible consultations seen by the inpatient PC team equally in one month before and after the announcement of POS on February 8, 2018. The eligibility criteria include (1) cancer diagnosis, (2) ≥18 years of age, (3) taking opioid medication at the time of consultation, and (4) having at least two consecutive visits with the PC team. Patient demographics, cancer type, opioid type, route, and dose defined as the morphine equivalent daily dose were assessed. Results: POS was associated with less use of parenteral opioids (patient controlled analgesia, and intravenous breakthrough) and more use of non-parenteral opioids (extended release, transdermal, and oral breakthrough) by the referring oncology teams, and PC team (P≤.001) (Table 1). At first PC follow-up, significantly less proportion of patients achieved better pain control after POS [119/193 (62%) versus 144/193 (75%) (P=.006)] However, at second PC follow-up, the proportion of pain improvement was similar in both cohorts. Conclusions: There is a significant change in opioid routes associated with POS. POS was associated with worse analgesia. More research is needed to better understand the impact of POS on cancer pain management.[Table: see text]

scholarly journals Managing Pain in Patients With Cancer: The Chinese Good Pain Management Experience

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (5) ◽  
pp. 583-595 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shi-Ying Yu ◽  
Jie-Jun Wang ◽  
Yu-guang Huang ◽  
Bing Hu ◽  
Kun Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Pain Management ◽  
High Standard ◽  
Management Training ◽  
Drug Dose ◽  
Dose Titration ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Opioid Drugs

Purpose The number of cancer cases in China has increased rapidly from 2.1 million in 2000 to 4.3 million in 2015. As a consequence, pain management as an integral part of cancer treatment became an important health care issue. In March 2011, the Good Pain Management (GPM) program was launched to standardize the treatment of cancer pain and improve the quality of life for patients with cancer. With this work, we will describe the GPM program, its implementation experience, and highlight key lessons that can improve pain management for patients with cancer. Methods We describe procedures for the selection, implementation, and assessment procedures for model cancer wards. We analyzed published results in areas of staff training and patient education, pain management in practice, analgesic drugs administration, and patient follow-up and satisfaction. Results Pain management training enabled medical staff to accurately assess the level of pain and to provide effective pain relief through timely dispensation of medication. Patients with good knowledge of treatment of pain were able to overcome their aversion to opioid drugs and cooperate with nursing staff on pain assessment to achieve effective drug dose titration. Consumption of strong opioid drugs increased significantly; however, there was no change for weaker opioids. Higher pain remission rates were achieved for patients with moderate-to-severe pain levels. Proper patient follow-up after discharge enabled improved outcomes to be maintained. Conclusion The GPM program has instituted a consistent and high standard of care for pain management at cancer wards and improved the quality of life for patients with cancer.

Interventional Therapies for Cancer Pain Management: Important Adjuvants to Systemic Analgesics

2007 ◽  
Vol 5 (8) ◽  
pp. 851-858 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony Eidelman ◽  
Traci White ◽  
Robert A. Swarm
Keyword(s):  
Pain Management ◽  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Cancer Pain ◽  
Pain Control ◽  
Analgesic Efficacy ◽  
Cancer Pain Management ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Inflammatory Drugs ◽  
Control Pain ◽  
Interventional Therapies

Optimized use of systemic analgesics fails to adequately control pain in some patients with cancer. Commonly used analgesics, including opioids, nonopioids (acetaminophen and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs), and adjuvant analgesics (anticonvulsants and antidepressants), have limited analgesic efficacy, and their use is often associated with adverse effects. Without adequate pain control, patients with cancer not only experience the anguish of poorly controlled pain but also have greatly diminished quality of life and may even have reduced life expectancy. Interventional pain therapies are a diverse set of procedural techniques for controlling pain that may be useful when systemic analgesics fail to provide adequate control of cancer pain or when the adverse effects of systemic analgesics cannot be managed reasonably. Commonly used interventional therapies for cancer pain include neurolytic neural blockade, spinal administration of analgesics, and vertebroplasty. Compared with systemic analgesics, which generally have broad indications for control of pain, individual interventional therapies generally have specific, narrow indications. When appropriately selected and implemented, interventional pain therapies are important components of broad, multimodal cancer pain management that significantly increases the proportion of patients able to experience adequate pain control.

Analysis of the patient-related barriers in cancer pain anagement in Turkish patients

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e20699-e20699
Author(s):  
G. Bagçivan ◽  
N. Tosun ◽  
S. Kömürcü ◽  
A. Özet ◽  
N. Akbayrak
Keyword(s):  
Pain Management ◽  
Cancer Pain ◽  
Brief Pain Inventory ◽  
Cancer Pain Management ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Demographic Questionnaire ◽  
Average Pain ◽  
Turkish Patients ◽  
Reliable Scale

e20699 Background: The most important issue, which may be preventing effective cancer pain management, have generally been the barriers originating from misbelieve or misunderstandings, which lead patients to be reluctant to report pain and receive the appropriate analgesic. It is the first study about this issue in Turkey. Methods: This study was planned as a descriptive and cross-sectional. The sample was 170 patients with cancer, who used or is still using analgesic medication for pain related to cancer. Demographic Questionnaire, Brief Pain Inventory and BQ-II were used for data collection. The reliability coefficient for the total scale and subscales (Cronbach's α) were calculated. Test and retest results were compared to determine the scales validity for Turkish patients. All statistical analyses were performed with the SPSS 15.0.The value p≤0.05 was considered ‘statistically significant’. Results: As a result of the factor analysis made for BQ-II, seven factors that make up for 66.451% of the total variance were found. Cronbach's alpha value was 0.87 for the BQ-II. According to the points given by patients to the items in BQ-II, it was seen that they have beliefs that may be barriers to optimal pain management mostly in “addiction” and minimally in “physical side effects” subscale. It was ascertained that male, not married patients, patients with a chronic disease other than cancer, patients whose “average pain” level is >5 and who use inadequate analgesic have more beliefs that may be barriers to optimal pain management. Conclusions: BQ-II was a valid and reliable scale for Turkish defining patient related barriers in cancer pain management. Items suggested by patients such as “family related barriers” and “family members’ role and responsibilities” could be added to the BQ-II for future studies. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Quality of Cancer Pain Management: An Update of a Systematic Review of Undertreatment of Patients With Cancer

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (36) ◽  
pp. 4149-4154 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Teresa Greco ◽  
Anna Roberto ◽  
Oscar Corli ◽  
Silvia Deandrea ◽  
Elena Bandieri ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Pain Management ◽  
Cancer Pain ◽  
Experimental Studies ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Substantial Impact ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Pain Management Index ◽  
Before And After

Purpose Pain is a frequent symptom in patients with cancer, with substantial impact. Despite the availability of opioids and updated guidelines from reliable leading societies, undertreatment is still frequent. Methods We updated a systematic review published in 2008, which showed that according to the Pain Management Index (PMI), 43.4% of patients with cancer were undertreated. This review included observational and experimental studies reporting negative PMI scores for adults with cancer and pain published from 2007 to 2013 and retrieved through MEDLINE, Embase, and Google Scholar. To detect any temporal trend and identify potential determinants of undertreatment, we compared articles published before and after 2007 with univariable, multivariable, and sensitivity analyses. Results In the new set of 20 articles published from 2007 to 2013, there was a decrease in undertreatment of approximately 25% (from 43.4 to 31.8%). In the whole sample, the proportion of undertreated patients fell from 2007 to 2013, and an association was confirmed between negative PMI score, economic level, and nonspecific setting for cancer pain. Sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of results. Conclusion Analysis of 46 articles published from 1994 to 2013 using the PMI to assess the adequacy of analgesic therapy suggests the quality of pharmacologic pain management has improved. However, approximately one third of patients still do not receive pain medication proportional to their pain intensity.

scholarly journals Prospective, Observational Study of Pain and Analgesic Prescribing in Medical Oncology Outpatients With Breast, Colorectal, Lung, or Prostate Cancer

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (16) ◽  
pp. 1980-1988 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael J. Fisch ◽  
Ju-Whei Lee ◽  
Matthias Weiss ◽  
Lynne I. Wagner ◽  
Victor T. Chang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pain Management ◽  
Pain Treatment ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Multivariable Analysis ◽  
Initial Assessment ◽  
Explanatory Variables ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Pain Management Index ◽  
Treatment Adequacy

Purpose Pain is prevalent among patients with cancer, yet pain management patterns in outpatient oncology are poorly understood. Patients and Methods A total of 3,123 ambulatory patients with invasive cancer of the breast, prostate, colon/rectum, or lung were enrolled onto this prospective study regardless of phase of care or stage of disease. At initial assessment and 4 to 5 weeks later, patients completed a 25-item measure of pain, functional interference, and other symptoms. Providers recorded analgesic prescribing. The pain management index was calculated to assess treatment adequacy. Results Of the 3,023 patients we identified to be at risk for pain, 2,026 (67%) reported having pain or requiring analgesics at initial assessment; of these 2,026 patients, 670 (33%) were receiving inadequate analgesic prescribing. We found no difference in treatment adequacy between the initial and follow-up visits. Multivariable analysis revealed that the odds of a non-Hispanic white patient having inadequate pain treatment were approximately half those of a minority patient after adjusting for other explanatory variables (odds ratio, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.70; P = .002). Other significant predictors of inadequate pain treatment were having a good performance status, being treated at a minority treatment site, and having nonadvanced disease without concurrent treatment. Conclusion Most outpatients with common solid tumors must confront issues related to pain and the use of analgesics. There is significant disparity in pain treatment adequacy, with the odds of undertreatment twice as high for minority patients. These findings persist over 1 month of follow-up, highlighting the complexity of these problems.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document