scholarly journals Analgesic choice in patients presenting to emergency department with cancer pain: a prospective study

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (5) ◽  
pp. 68-73
Author(s):  
Şeref Emre Atiş ◽  
Bora Çekmen ◽  
Asım Kalkan ◽  
Öner Bozan ◽  
Mücahit Şentürk ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Cancer Pain ◽  
Pain Score ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Opioid Therapy ◽  
Pain Scores ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Inflammatory Drugs ◽  
Anti Inflammatory ◽  
Median Pain

Background. Acute onset pain is one of the common reasons for cancer patients to present to the emergency department. In our study, we compared painkillers used in cancer patients admitted to the emergency department with pain complaints and their effectiveness and the superiorities of these painkillers in pain relief and their superiorities over each other. Materials and methods. The pain scores of the patients were asked at the time of admission by showing a visual analogue scale. Before treatment, pain scores were recorded. The patients were divided into four different groups according to the type of given treatment: non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs; opioid painkillers; paracetamol; paracetamol and opioid therapy. After the treatment, we asked which painkiller written in the treatment form was administered to the patient and recorded the pain score. Results. It was observed that the median pain score before and after treatment of the patients in all painkiller groups differed statically. When the median scores before and after treatment were compared according to drug types, no difference was found between the decrease in pain scores (p = 0.956 and p = 0.705, respectively). It was concluded that the pre-treatment and post-treatment median pain scores of patients who are using non-steroid anti-inflammatory drugs and opioids at home did not differ statistically (p = 0.063). Conclusions. The use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, paracetamol or opioids was not found to be superior to each other in patients with acute severe cancer pain.

scholarly journals A Pilot Randomised Clinical Trial of 3-In-1 Femoral Nerve Block and Intravenous Morphine as Primary Analgesia for Patients Presenting to the Emergency Department with Fractured Hip

2008 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 205-211 ◽  
Author(s):  
CA Graham ◽  
K Baird ◽  
AC McGuffie
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Pain Score ◽  
Nerve Block ◽  
Femoral Nerve Block ◽  
Femoral Nerve ◽  
Wilcoxon Test ◽  
Block Group ◽  
Pain Scores ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Median Pain

Background Fractured neck of femur (NOF) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the elderly. Published clinical guidelines suggest early adequate analgesia as a key management aim. The femoral nerve ‘3-in-1 block’ has previously been shown to provide effective analgesia for these patients in the peri- and post-operative phase of care. The aim of this study was to examine the use of the ‘3-in-1’ femoral nerve block as primary analgesia for patients with a fractured NOF presenting to the emergency department. Methods This was a single centre pragmatic randomised controlled open-label trial comparing femoral nerve block (using a ‘3-in-1’ technique) with intravenous (IV) morphine. A convenience sample of patients presenting to the emergency department of a district general hospital with a clinically or radiologically suspected fractured NOF were recruited. They were randomised to receive either 0.1 mg/kg IV bolus of morphine or a ‘3-in-1’ femoral nerve block with 30 ml of 0.5% plain bupivacaine. Visual analogue pain scores were noted prior to treatment and at 30 minutes, 2 hours, 6 hours and 12 hours after treatment. Immediate complications such as vascular puncture or the requirement for naloxone were noted. Results Forty patients were recruited, 22 patients were randomised to IV morphine and 18 patients were randomised to ‘3-in-1’ femoral nerve block. Complete data were available for 33 patients. There was no significant difference in initial median pain score (p=0.45). Analysis using the Wilcoxon test showed a significant decrease in pain score for the morphine group (p=0.01) and the nerve block group (p<0.01) at 30 minutes compared with baseline. Analysis using the Mann-Whitney U test between median pain scores at each time point showed a significant lower pain score in the nerve block group at 30 minutes (p=0.046). There were no immediate complications in either group. Conclusion Our results suggest that a ‘3-in-1’ femoral nerve block is at least as effective as IV morphine when used as primary analgesia for patients with fractured NOF. Our results suggest that the femoral nerve block may provide better analgesia at 30 minutes. Further larger scale randomised trials are warranted.

scholarly journals Comparison of Real-world Outcomes Between Patients Treated with Tapentadol ER or Oxycodone CR

10.36469/9905 ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 221-232
Author(s):  
Mike Durkin ◽  
Jacqueline Pesa ◽  
Jessica Lopatto ◽  
Rachel Halpern ◽  
Damon Van Voorhis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Emergency Department Visit ◽  
Healthcare Costs ◽  
Index Date ◽  
Opioid Therapy ◽  
Care Utilization ◽  
Research Database ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Pain Patients

Background: The objective of this study was to compare health care utilization and costs between matched cohorts of chronic pain patients treated with the opioids tapentadol extended release (ER) or oxycodone controlled release (CR). Methods: This retrospective study used claims data from the Optum Research Database. Commercial and Medicare Advantage adult patients with ≥1 prescription fill for oxycodone CR or tapentadol ER between September 1, 2011 and September 30, 2012 were eligible. The date of the first observed oxycodone CR or tapentadol ER claim was the index date. Patients had continuous health plan enrollment for 6 months before and after the index date, ≥ 90 days supply of opioid therapy, and no index drug claims in the preindex period. Patients were propensity score matched in a 1:2 ratio (tapentadol ER : oxycodone CR). Results: The attributes of the matched cohorts (1,120 tapentadol ER and 2,240 oxycodone CR patients) appeared similar. In the 6 month post-index period, lower proportions of the tapentadol ER cohort than the oxycodone CR cohort had ≥1 inpatient stay (14.6% versus 20.5%; p&lt;0.001) and ≥1 emergency department visit (33.4% versus 37.5%; p=0.021). The tapentadol ER compared with the oxycodone CR cohort had higher mean pharmacy costs ($4,263 versus $3,694; p &lt;0.001), lower mean inpatient costs ($3,625 versus $6,309; p&lt;0.001), and lower mean total healthcare costs ($16,510 versus $19,330; p=0.004). Conclusions: During follow-up, total mean healthcare costs were lower among tapentadol ER patients than oxycodone CR patients, and tapentadol ER patients were less likely to have an inpatient admission or emergency department visit.

scholarly journals Oral nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for cancer pain in adults

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sheena Derry ◽  
Philip J Wiffen ◽  
R Andrew Moore ◽  
Ewan D McNicol ◽  
Rae F Bell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Pain ◽  
Inflammatory Drugs ◽  
Anti Inflammatory

scholarly journals Intravenous Paracetamol vs Intranasal Desmopressin for Renal Colic in the Emergency Department: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Pain Medicine ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (12) ◽  
pp. 3437-3442
Author(s):  
Hamed Basir Ghafouri ◽  
Niloofar Abazarian ◽  
Mohammadreza Yasinzadeh ◽  
Ehsan Modirian
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Emergency Department ◽  
Pain Score ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trial ◽  
Renal Colic ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Pain Scores ◽  
Intravenous Paracetamol ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Intranasal Desmopressin

Abstract Objective To evaluate the analgesic efficacy of intranasal desmopressin alone vs intravenous paracetamol in patients referred to the emergency department with renal colic. Design Randomized clinical trial. Setting This study was conducted in the emergency unit of a university hospital. Subjects Patients referred to the emergency room with renal colic. Primary Outcome Effect of intranasal desmopressin in pain relief in comparison with intravenous paracetamol. Methods In this trial, 240 patients diagnosed with renal colic were randomly divided into two groups to compare the analgesic effect of intravenous paracetamol (15 mg/kg) and intranasal desmopressin spray (40 μg). Pain scores were measured by a numeric rating scale at baseline and after 15, 30, and 60 minutes. Adverse effects and need for rescue analgesic (0.05 mg/kg max 3 mg morphine sulphate) were also recorded at the end of the study. Results Three hundred patients were eligible for the study; however, 240 were included in the final analysis. The patients in the two groups were similar in their baseline characteristics and baseline pain scores. The mean pain score after 15 minutes was more reduced and was clinically significant (&gt;3) in the desmopressin group (P &lt; 0.0001). There was no significant difference between mean pain scores in the two groups after 30 minutes (P = 0.350) or 60 minutes (P = 0.269), but the efficacy of the two drugs was significant in terms of pain reduction (&gt;6). Conclusions Our study showed that intranasal desmopressin is as effective as intravenous paracetamol for renal colic pain management; however, significant clinical reduction in pain score occurred faster with intranasal desmopressin.

scholarly journals Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Eccleston ◽  
Tess E Cooper ◽  
Emma Fisher ◽  
Brian Anderson ◽  
Nick MR Wilkinson
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Pain ◽  
Children And Adolescents ◽  
Inflammatory Drugs ◽  
Anti Inflammatory

scholarly journals Health service utilisation by people living with chronic non-cancer pain: findings from the Pain and Opioids IN Treatment (POINT) study

2016 ◽  
Vol 40 (5) ◽  
pp. 490 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suzanne Nielsen ◽  
Gabrielle Campbell ◽  
Amy Peacock ◽  
Kimberly Smith ◽  
Raimondo Bruno ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Insurance ◽  
Cancer Pain ◽  
Private Health Insurance ◽  
Healthcare Services ◽  
Opioid Therapy ◽  
Limited Evidence ◽  
Financial Barriers ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Before And After

Objective The aims of the present study were to describe the use, and barriers to the use, of non-medication pain therapies and to identify the demographic and clinical correlates of different non-opioid pain treatments. Methods The study was performed on a cohort (n = 1514) of people prescribed pharmaceutical opioids for chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP). Participants reported lifetime and past month use of healthcare services, mental and physical health, pain characteristics, current oral morphine equivalent daily doses and financial and access barriers to healthcare services. Results Participants reported the use of non-opioid pain treatments, both before and after commencing opioid therapy. Services accessed most in the past month were complementary and alternative medicines (CAMs; 41%), physiotherapy (16%) and medical and/or pain specialists (15%). Higher opioid dose was associated with increased financial and access barriers to non-opioid treatment. Multivariate analyses indicated being younger, female and having private health insurance were the factors most commonly associated with accessing non-opioid treatments. Conclusions Patients on long-term opioid therapy report using multiple types of pain treatments. High rates of CAM use are concerning given limited evidence of efficacy for some therapies and the low-income status of most people with CNCP. Financial and insurance barriers highlight the importance of considering how different types of treatments are paid for and subsidised. What is known about the topic? Given concerns regarding long-term efficacy, adverse side-effects and risk of misuse and dependence, prescribing guidelines recommend caution in prescribing pharmaceutical opioids in cases of CNCP, typically advising a multidisciplinary approach to treatment. There is a range of evidence supporting different (non-drug) treatment approaches for CNCP to reduce pain severity and increase functioning. However, little is known about the non-opioid treatments used among those with CNCP and the demographic and clinical characteristics that may be associated with the use of different types of treatments. Understanding the use of non-drug therapy among people with CNCP is crucial given the potential to improve pain control for these patients. What does this paper add? The present study found that a wide range of non-opioid treatments was accessed by the study sample, both before and after commencing opioids, indicating that in this sample opioids were not the sole strategy used for pain management. The most common treatment (other than opioids) was CAM, reported by two-fifths of the sample. Having private health insurance was associated with increased use of non-opioid treatments for pain, highlighting the importance of considering how treatments are paid for and potential financial barriers to effective treatments. What are the implications for practitioners? Patients’ beliefs and financial barriers may affect the uptake of different treatments. Many patients may be using complementary and alternative approaches with limited evidence to support their use, highlighting the need for clinicians to discuss with patients the range of prescribed and non-prescribed treatments they are accessing and to help them understand the benefits and risks of treatments that have not been tested sufficiently, or have inconsistent evidence, as to their efficacy in improving pain outcomes.

scholarly journals Metamizole/dipyrone for the relief of cancer pain: A systematic review and evidence-based recommendations for clinical practice

2016 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan Gaertner ◽  
Ulrike M Stamer ◽  
Constanze Remi ◽  
Raymond Voltz ◽  
Claudia Bausewein ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cancer Pain ◽  
Pain Intensity ◽  
Oral Morphine ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Low Doses ◽  
Inflammatory Drugs ◽  
Anti Inflammatory

Background: Dipyrone (metamizole) is one of the most widely used non-opioid analgesics for the treatment of cancer pain. Aim: Because evidence-based recommendations are not yet available, a systematic review was conducted for the German Guideline Program in Oncology to provide recommendations for the use of dipyrone in cancer pain. Design: First, a systematic review for clinical trials assessing dipyrone in adult patients with cancer pain was conducted. Endpoints were pain intensity, opioid-sparing effects, safety, and quality of life. Data sources: The search was performed in MedLine, Embase (via Ovid), and the Cochrane Library (1948–2013) and additional hand search was conducted. Finally, recommendations were developed and agreed in a formal structured consensus process by 53 representatives of scientific medical societies and 49 experts. Results: Of 177 retrieved studies, 4 could be included (3 randomized controlled trials and 1 cohort study, n = 252 patients): dipyrone significantly decreased pain intensity compared to placebo, even if low doses (1.5–2 g/day) were used. Higher doses (3 × 2 g/day) were more effective than low doses (3 × 1 g/day), but equally effective as 60 mg oral morphine/day. Pain reduction of dipyrone and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs did not differ significantly. Compared to placebo, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and morphine, the incidence of adverse effects was not increased. Conclusion: Dipyrone can be recommended for the treatment of cancer pain as an alternative to other non-opioids either alone or in combination with opioids. It can be preferred over non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs due to the presumably favorable side effect profile in long-term use, but comparative studies are not available for long-term use.

scholarly journals Relationship between Pain Scores and EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL Scores in Outpatients with Cancer Pain Receiving Opioid Therapy

2021 ◽  
Vol 44 (3) ◽  
pp. 357-362
Author(s):  
Chikako Matsumura ◽  
Masami Yamada ◽  
Yumi Jimaru ◽  
Rie Ueno ◽  
Kazushige Takahashi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Pain ◽  
Opioid Therapy ◽  
Pain Scores ◽  
Eortc Qlq

scholarly journals Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the post-operative treatment of ophthalmic patients

2015 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 45-48
Author(s):  
Sergey Yurievich Astakhov ◽  
Medeya Vakhtangovna Gobedzhishvili
Keyword(s):  
Cataract Surgery ◽  
Operative Treatment ◽  
Cataract Extraction ◽  
Eye Drops ◽  
Treatment Results ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Inflammatory Processes ◽  
Inflammatory Drugs ◽  
Anti Inflammatory

Purpose: to analyze the efficacy of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) after cataract extraction. To determine the NSAID’s role in post-operative inflammatory processes treatment. Results: the rationale of NSAIDs use before and after cataract surgery was validated. The NSAIDs efficacy in terms of post-op inflammation reduction was confirmed. Among NSAIDs benefits, the convenient and easy-to-use instillation regimen of Bromfenac 0.09% eye drops solution was highlighted.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document