Pharmacoeconomic analysis of the application of strong opioids for the treatment of chronic pain syndrome in patients with pancreatic cancer

Objective: to evaluate the clinical and economic feasibility of opioid therapy based on the analysis of its cost and effectiveness in patients with chronic pain syndrome in pancreatic cancer.Material and methods. An observational prospective study in parallel groups of patients with chronic pain syndrome associated with pancreatic cancer was carried out. The analysis of cost minimization and cost-effectiveness was applied, as well as pharmacoeconomic modeling, which included the construction of a decision tree in patients receiving morphine sulfate (n=45) and fentanyl TTS (n=45) for pain relief. The sensitivity of the obtained data was assessed using one-way analysis.Results. It was shown that the treatment of chronic pain syndrome in patients with pancreatic cancer with opioid analgesics as part of combined treatment is the least expensive in the morphine sulfate group (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio 144.93). Based on the results of modeling, the prognostic factors of influence on the cost of analgesic therapy were determined: the cost of combined analgesic therapy, the cost of treatment of adverse reactions, and the cost-effectiveness ratio.Conclusion. Analgesic therapy of chronic pain syndrome with morphine sulfate in patients with pancreatic cancer is pharmacoeconomically feasible.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE RESULTS OF PLASTIC INGUINAL HERNIA LAPAROSCOPIC AND TRADITIONAL METHODS

Purpose of the study. Conduct a retrospective comparative analysis of the results of laparoscopic and traditional methods of inguinal hernia repair, patients treated at the surgical departments at “A.N. Syzganov National Scientific Center of Surgery”, Almaty, Kazakhstan. Materials and methods. In the period from January 2017 to December 2020 137 patients were operated at the “A.N. Syzganov National Scientific Center of Surgery” in a planned manner for inguinal hernia and all patients were divided into 2 main groups: operated by traditional methods and laparoscopic method. Results.The data of the analysis suggests that the laparoscopic method of hernioplasty has an advantage over the traditional methods. Conclusion. Based on a comparative analysis of the indicators of patients in both groups, it can be concluded that the duration of the operation for laparoscopic hernia repair is 92.3 minutes, significantly more than with traditional methods, which is 79.4 minutes. Despite this, the duration of analgesic therapy in the postoperative period with laparoscopic hernia repair is 2.4 days, and the duration of hospital stay after surgery is 3 days, much less than with traditional methods, in which the duration of analgesic therapy in the postoperative period is 3, 3 days, and the duration of hospital stay after surgery is 4.6 days. This analysis suggests that laparoscopic hernioplasty has an advantage over traditional methods.

Satisfaction with analgesic therapy in patients with rheumatic diseases in real clinical practice, according to the KOMPAS study (Quality of Pain Relief in the Opinion of Patients with Arthritis and Back Pain)

Patient's satisfaction with treatment is a fundamental indicator of the quality of medical care, which is especially important for assessing the effectiveness of therapy for musculoskeletal pain in rheumatic diseases (RD).Objective: to determine satisfaction of patients with RD with pain relief therapy and to analyze the factors influencing the subjective assessment of analgesic therapy.Patients and methods. Anonymous survey of 1040 patients (age 55.8±14.0 years, 76.8% were women) with RD, rheumatoid arthritis (RA), osteoarthritis (OA), spondyloarthritis, systemic connective tissue diseases and gout, was carried out. The presence of pain and its therapy, satisfaction with treatment, and patient's opinion about the reasons of low pain relief effectiveness were assessed. The dependence of the presence of dissatisfaction with treatment on a number of demographic and clinical factors was analyzed.Results and discussion. 71.5% of patients experienced pain in one or more joint areas and/or in the back. 70.6% of patients used non-steroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), 1.6% – paracetamol, 40.0% – non-drug modalities and methods of alternative medicine. 15.6% of the respondents were completely satisfied with the treatment, 64.0% were partially satisfied, and 20.4% were completely dissatisfied. The main subjective reasons for the insufficient effectiveness of analgesic therapy were: fear of taking prescribed medications due to possible complications (45.4%), low effectiveness of drugs (15.7%), insufficient attention of doctors (20.3%). Male gender, body mass index >30 kg/m2 , severe pain, pain in several areas, and the diagnosis of OA were statistically significantly associated with treatment dissatisfaction. In contrast, patients with RA showed greater satisfaction with treatment.Conclusion. Most patients with RD are dissatisfied with the results of pain therapy. Educational work with patients and a personalized approach to prescribing analgesic therapy is needed.

AB0267 HOW EFFECTIVE IS PAIN MANAGEMENT IN THE PATIENTS’ OPINION? DATA FROM THE COMPAS STUDY

Objectives:to evaluate the effectiveness and satisfaction of pain management in patients with rheumatic diseases (RD) according to a survey in the COMPAS (Quality of Pain Management according to Patients with Arthritis and Back pain) study.Methods:the survey involved 1040 patients with RD (rheumatoid arthritis-40.6%, osteoarthritis -32.1%, spondyloarthritis-10.6%, connective tissue diseases-8.6% of patients). 76.8% were women, the mean age was 55.8±14.0 years. 35.7% of patients continued to work in their specialty, 31.6% had various degrees of disability. The effectiveness of pain therapy was evaluated by the patient in the last month preceding the survey on a 5-point scale, where 1 - no effect and 5-excellent effect. Patients ‘ satisfaction with treatment, possible reasons for the lack of effectiveness of pain therapy and the use of additional treatment tools were also evaluated.Results:as therapy for the underlying disease, 40% of patients received conventional disease modifying antirheumatic drugs, 33.1% - glucocorticoids, 7.2% - biological agents and 15.2% - symptomatic slow-acting drugs in osteoarthritis. At the same time, 68% of patients needed additional analgesic therapy with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Slightly less than half of the surveyed patients (46.9%) noted a moderate effect of analgesic therapy, 22.7% - a low effect and 5% - no effect, 23.7% rated the effectiveness of therapy as good and only 1.7% - as excellent. At the same time, only 15.6% of patients were completely satisfied with the result of NSAIDs, 64% were partially satisfied with the treatment and 20.4% were completely dissatisfied. As the reason of insufficient effectiveness of NSAIDs, most often (34.3%) patients named fear of adverse events associated with taking drugs, 19.4% - weak drugs, 15.3% - insufficient attention of doctors to complaints, 6.6% - poor diagnosis of the causes of pain. Others found it difficult to answer or were completely satisfied with the treatment. 40% of patients used additional methods, most often chiropractic (12.3%), acupuncture (4.8%), physiotherapy (12.7%) and folk remedies (7.4%).Conclusion:A significant proportion of patients with RD don’t have adequate pain control. Only 25.4% of patients rate the result of treatment as good and excellent, and even fewer patients (15.6%) are completely satisfied with the results of therapy. Thus, a personalized approach to analgesic therapy is necessary, taking into account the expectations of patients regarding the results of treatment.Disclosure of Interests:None declared

Multimodal Pain Management in the Setting of Palliative Care

Pain as an integral part of palliative care (PC) is often present at the end of the life. Today, many different analgesics from opioids and non- opioids origin are in use. The integration of their use is the most effective method for pain relief. The aim of this chapter is to discuss different therapeutic approaches to pain management in palliative care. Palliative care is being confronted between the expectations and the possibilities to provide an efficient relief from the symptoms, the pain and the stress. The possibility to use opioids for pain management, with all side effects, and non-addictive drugs as additional treatment, improves the quality and the duration of life for the patients in palliative care. Since the origin of the pain is different, the use of analgesic therapy should be individualized and adapted to the real need of every person. Finally, only a good organization and institutionalization of palliative care in the society could allow for better prevention of suffering at the end of the life.

The use of oral opioids to control children’s pain in the post-codeine era

Pain is a common problem for children, and pain management comprises both pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic measures. For moderate to severe pain, oral opioids have been a popular choice for the last few decades. Codeine has historically been the best-known oral opioid for use in children. However, availability and use of codeine have sharply declined due to safety concerns. A variety of other opioids have been used in place of codeine, but data are limited regarding their efficacy and safety in children. While the same pathways metabolize oral oxycodone as codeine, oxycodone’s pharmacokinetics varies widely. There are also limited data on the safety and efficacy of oral hydromorphone and tramadol use for children. Oral morphine is the opiate alternative to codeine for which there is the most evidence of safety and efficacy in children. Research is needed to investigate both other opioids and non-opioid approaches to guide evidence-based analgesic therapy and treatment for moderate-to-severe pain in children.

Anxiety and Fear Avoidance Beliefs and Behavior May Be Significant Risk Factors for Chronic Opioid Analgesic Therapy Reliance for Patients with Chronic Pain – Results from a Preliminary Study

Objective To describe differences between patients with chronic, non-cancer pain (CNCP) who were successfully able to cease full mu agonist chronic opioid analgesic therapy (COAT), and those who exhibited refractory COAT reliance, amongst those who participated in a multidisciplinary program designed for COAT cessation. Design A retrospective review of electronic medical records (EMR) data was organized for preliminary analysis. Setting A multi-center private practice specializing in CNCP, which received patient referrals from the surrounding geographical area of primary and specialty care offices in Northern California. Subjects Data from 109 patients with CNCP who participated in a multidisciplinary program to cease COAT between the dates of October 2017 to December 2019 were examined. Methods EMR data, pre-COAT cessation, of oral morphine milligram equivalence (MME) and validated questionnaire responses assessing anxiety and fear-based beliefs and behavior, as well as opioid misuse, were extracted and compared between those who successfully ceased COAT and those who did not. Results Patients who were unsuccessful at COAT cessation reported significantly higher Fear Avoidance Behavior Questionnaire (FAB) scores. No significant differences were found based on incoming MME amounts, Current Opioid Misuse Measure (COMM) or Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia (TSK) scores. Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS) scores showed a split pattern with unclear significance. Conclusions Results suggest that fear avoidance beliefs and behavior, as measured by the FAB, play a significant role in refractory COAT reliance for patients with CNCP.