scholarly journals Ethical Insights to Rapprochement in Pain Care: Bringing Stakeholders Together in the Best Interest(s) of the Patient

2009 ◽  
Vol 4;12 (4;7) ◽  
pp. E265-E275
Author(s):  
James Giordano

Advances in medicine have produced an elongated lifespan often burdened by chronic disorders. Throughout the lifespan and at end of life such disorders can give rise to intractable pain. Although clear distinctions about the respective role(s) for pain therapeutics and palliative medicine remain debatable, both are involved in chronic pain care. Such care has reached a point of crisis fueled by tensions within and between clinical, administrative, and economic factors. We call for a strategy of rapprochement to reconcile these tensions as a means to facilitate more effective and ethically sound pain care. We describe roles and values of principal stakeholders: palliative- and pain-care physicians, chronic pain patients, insurance providers, and hospital administrators and elucidate how dissonances between these groups may contribute to inefficacy of the pain care system and sustain chronic, maldynic pain. We discuss how such values affect use of evidence and resources and explicate frameworks for an ameliorative rapprochement model that acknowledges and balances relative needs and values of all stakeholders. While we have tried to depict why rapprochement is necessary, and possible, the more difficult task is to determine how this process should be articulated and what shape a profession of total pain care might assume. Key words: Pain medicine, palliative care, ethics, policy, collaboration, rapprochement

2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (20;7) ◽  
pp. 597-610
Author(s):  
Eduardo A. Garza-Villarreal

Background: Music is increasingly used as an adjuvant for the management of chronic pain (CP), as it is non-invasive, inexpensive, and patients usually report positive experiences with it. However, little is known about its clinical efficacy in chronic pain patients. Objectives: We aimed to determine the effect of music as an adjuvant for chronic pain, as well as to identify characteristics of music interventions associated with positive clinical outcomes. Study Design: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we investigated randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of adult patients that reported any type of music intervention for chronic pain, chosen by the researcher or patient, lasting for any duration. Searches were performed using PsycINFO, Scopus, and PubMed for RCTs published until the end of May 2016. The primary outcome was reduction in self-reported pain using a standardized pain measurement instrument, reported post-intervention. The secondary outcomes were: quality of life measures, depression, anxiety, and related measures. Methods: The study was pre-registered with PROSPERO (CRD42016039837), and the metaanalysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 (The Nordic Cochrane Centre for The Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen, Denmark). We identified 768 titles and abstracts, and we included 14 RTCs that fulfilled our criteria. The sample size of the studies varied between 25 and 200 patients. Results: We found that music reduced self-reported chronic pain and depressive symptoms. We also found that music had a greater effect when the patient chose the music, compared to when the researcher chose it. Limitations: The sample size of RCTs was small and sometimes with different outcome measures. There was high heterogeneity associated with pooled estimates. Conclusions: Our analysis suggests that music may be beneficial as an adjuvant for chronic pain patients, as it reduces self-reported pain and its common comorbidities. Importantly, the analgesic effect of music appears higher with self-chosen over researcher-chosen music. Key Words: Pain, music, analgesia, music-induced analgesia, chronic pain, meta-analysis, systematic review, therapy Pain Physician 201


2020 ◽  
Vol 4S;23 (8;4S) ◽  
pp. S161-S182
Author(s):  
Shalini Shah

Background: Chronic pain patients require continuity of care even during the COVID-19 pandemic, which has drastically changed healthcare and other societal practices. The American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP) has created the COVID-ASIPP Risk Mitigation and Stratification (COVID-ARMS) Return to Practice Task Force in order to provide guidance for safe and strategic reopening. Objectives: The aims are to provide education and guidance for interventional pain specialists and their patients during the COVID-19 pandemic that minimizes COVID-related morbidity while allowing a return to interventional pain care. Methods: The methodology utilized included the development of objectives and key questions with utilization of trustworthy standards, appropriate disclosures of conflicts of interest, as well as a panel of experts from various regions, specialities, and groups. The literature pertaining to all aspects of COVID-19, specifically related to epidemiology, risk factors, complications, morbidity and mortality, and literature related to risk mitigation and stratification were reviewed. The principles of best-evidence synthesis of available literature and grading for recommendations as described by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), typically utilized in ASIPP guideline preparation, was not utilized in these guidelines due to the limitation based on lack of available literature on COVID-19, risk mitigation and stratification. Consequently, these guidelines are considered evidence-informed with the incorporation of the best-available research and practice knowledge. Results: Numerous risk factors have emerged that predispose patients to contracting COVID-19 and/or having a more severe course of the infection. COVID-19 may have mild symptoms, be asymptomatic, or may be severe and life-threatening. Older age and certain comorbidities, such as underlying pulmonary or cardiovascular disease, have been associated with worse outcomes. In pain care, COVID-19 patients are a heterogeneous group with some individuals relatively healthy and having only a short course of manageable symptoms, while others become critically ill. It is necessary to assess patients on a case-by-case basis and craft individualized care recommendations. A COVID-19 ARMS risk stratification tool was created to quickly and objectively assess patients. Interventional pain specialists and their patients may derive important benefits from evidenceinformed risk stratification, protective strategies to prevent infection, and the gradual resumption of treatments and procedures to manage pain. Limitations: COVID-19 was an ongoing pandemic at the time these recommendations were developed. The pandemic has created a fluid situation in terms of evidence-informed guidance. As more and better evidence is gathered, these recommendations may be modified. Conclusions: Chronic pain patients require continuity of care, but during the time of the COVID-19 pandemic, steps must be taken to stratify risks and protect patients from possible infection to safeguard them from COVID-19-related illness and transmitting the disease to others. Pain specialists should optimize telemedicine encounters with pain patients, be cognizant of risks of COVID-19 morbidity, and take steps to evaluate risk-benefit on a case-by-case basis. Pain specialists may return to practice with lower-risk patients and appropriate safeguards. Key words: Cardiovascular disease, COVID-19, interventional pain management, COVID risk factors, diabetes, hypertension, interventional pain care, novel coronavirus, obesity, SARS-nCoV2, steroids


2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Joël Perrin ◽  
Nina Streeck ◽  
Rahel Naef ◽  
Michael Rufer ◽  
Simon Peng-Keller ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The spiritual aspect of care is an often neglected resource in pain therapies. The aim of this study is to identify commonalities and differences in chronic pain patients’ (CPP) and health care professionals’ (HCP) perceptions on the integration of spiritual care into multimodal pain therapy. Methods We conducted a qualitative exploratory study with 42 CPPs and 34 HCPs who were interviewed in 12 separate groups in five study centres specialising in chronic pain within German-speaking Switzerland. The interviews were transcribed and subjected to a qualitative content analysis. Findings were generated by juxtaposing and analysing the statements of (a) HCP about HCP, (b) HCP about CPP, (c) CPP about HCP, and (d) CPP about CPP. Results Views on spiritual concerns and needs in chronic pain care can be described in three distinct dimensions: function (evaluating the need / request to discuss spiritual issues), structure (evaluating when / how to discuss spiritual issues) and context (evaluating why / under which circumstances to discuss spiritual issues). CPPs stress the importance of HCPs recognizing their overall human integrity, including the spiritual dimension, and would like to grant spiritual concerns greater significance in their therapy. HCPs express difficulties in addressing and discussing spiritual concerns and needs with chronic pain patients. Both parties want clarification of the context in which the spiritual dimension could be integrated into treatment. They see a need for greater awareness and training of HCPs in how the spiritual dimension in therapeutic interactions might be addressed. Conclusions Although there are similarities in the perspectives of HCPs and CPPs regarding spiritual concerns and needs in chronic pain care, there are relevant differences between the two groups. This might contribute to the neglect of the spiritual dimension in the treatment of chronic pain. Trial registration This study was part of a larger research project, registered in a primary (clinicaltrial.gov: NCT03679871) and local (kofam.ch: SNCTP000003086) clinical trial registry.


2005 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 235-242 ◽  
Author(s):  
Astrid von Bueren Jarchow ◽  
Bogdan P. Radanov ◽  
Lutz Jäncke

Abstract: The aim of the present study was to examine to what extent chronic pain has an impact on various attentional processes. To measure these attention processes a set of experimental standard tests of the “Testbatterie zur Aufmerksamkeitsprüfung” (TAP), a neuropsychological battery testing different levels of attention, were used: alertness, divided attention, covert attention, vigilance, visual search, and Go-NoGo tasks. 24 chronic outpatients and 24 well-matched healthy control subjects were tested. The control subjects were matched for age, gender, and education. The group of chronic pain patients exhibited marked deficiencies in all attentional functions except for the divided attention task. Thus, the data supports the notion that chronic pain negatively influences attention because pain patients` attention is strongly captivated by the internal pain stimuli. Only the more demanding divided attention task has the capability to distract the focus of attention to the pain stimuli. Therefore, the pain patients are capable of performing within normal limits. Based on these findings chronic pain patients' attentional deficits should be appropriately evaluated and considered for insurance and work related matters. The effect of a successful distraction away from the pain in the divided attention task can also open new therapeutic aspects.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document