Use of the World Health Organization guidelines on cancer pain relief before referral to a specialized pain service

In 1986 the World Health Organization (WHO) released guidelines for cancer pain relief. Since then, several controlled studies on effectiveness and practicability of these guidelines have been published. Various authors described inadequate use of these guidelines.We analysed, whether the pain medication of 160 cancer patients referred to the anesthesiological pain clinic at the university hospital of Vienna corresponded to the WHO guidelines or not. Adequacy of pain treatment was assessed using the pain management index (PMI). Multiple criteria were chosen to assess the conformity of the treatment with the guidelines. Furthermore we studied the effect of a strict use of the WHO guidelines in these patients.The average pain intensity of the referred patients was 75 mm (VAS). Negative PMI scores, indicating inadequate pain therapy, were fount in 39 % of cases. A violation of the rules was found in 38% of the therapy schedules. Pain medication was then modified by switching to fixed time intervals, escalation of the steps of the WHO ladder, increasing the dosage or treating neuropathic pain with adjuvant drugs. Two weeks later the average pain score of the patients was reduced to 27 mm (VAS). At that time 72% of the patients quoted an adequate reduction of pain.Inadequate knowledge or disregard of the WHO guidelines for cancer pain relief are common and result in unnecessary and prolonged suffering in these patients.

Long-term results following proximal row carpectomy.

The functional outcome, patient satisfaction, and x-ray film status for 23 wrists were examined an average of 6 years following proximal row carpectomy. Surgery was performed for Kienbock's disease, scapholunate dissociation with periscaphoid arthritis, and scaphoid nonunion not suitable for bone grafting. Twenty patients were satisfied with functional performance and pain relief. Wrist flexion-extension arc averaged 74 degrees, or 61%, of the opposite wrist at a later examination. Grip strength, corrected dor dominance, averaged 79% of the opposite side, reflecting an average improvement of 15 kg force. Radiocarpal arthritis developed in three wrists, but only one required arthrodesis for pain relief. The majority of patients experienced satisfactory pain relief, functional wrist motion, and effective grip strength following proximal row carpectomy. The results did not decline at an average of 6 years after surgery.

Relative efficacy of 32P and 89Sr in palliation in skeletal metastases.

32p and 89Sr have been shown to produce significant pain relief in patients with skeletal metastases from advanced cancer. Clinically significant pancytopenia has not been reported in doses up to 12 mCi (444 MBq) of either radionuclide. To date, no reports comparing the relative efficacy and toxicity of the two radionuclides in comparable patient populations have been available. Although a cure has not been reported, both treatments have achieved substantial pain relief. However, several studies have used semiquantitative measures such as "slight," "fair," "partial" and "dramatic" responses, which lend themselves to subjective bias. This report examines the responses to treatment with 32P or 89Sr by attempting a quantification of pain relief and quality of life using the patients as their own controls and compares toxicity in terms of hematological parameters. METHODS: Thirty-one patients with skeletal metastases were treated for pain relief with either 32P (16 patients) or 89Sr (15 patients). Inclusion criteria were pain from bone scan-positive sites above a subjective score of 5 of 10 despite analgesic therapy with narcotic or non-narcotic medication, limitation of movement related to the performance of routine daily activity and a predicted life expectancy of at least 4 mo. The patients had not had chemotherapy or radiotherapy during the previous 6 wk and had normal serum creatinine, white cell and platelet counts. 32P was given orally as a 12 mCi dose, and 89Sr was given intravenously as a 4 mCi (148 MBq) dose. The patients were monitored for 4 mo. RESULTS: Complete absence of pain was seen in 7 of 16 patients who were given 32P and in 7 of 15 patients who were given 89Sr. Pain scores fell by at least 50% of the pretreatment score in 14 of 16 patients who were given 32P and 14 of 15 patients who were given 89Sr. Mean duration of pain relief was 9.6 wk with 32P and 10 wk with 89Sr. Analgesic scores fell along with the drop in pain scores. A fall in total white cell, absolute granulocyte and platelet counts occurred in all patients. Subnormal values of white cells and platelets were seen in 5 and 7 patients, respectively, with 32P, and in 0 and 4 patients, respectively, after 89Sr therapy. The decrease in platelet count (but not absolute granulocyte count) was statistically significant when 32P patients were compared with 89Sr patients. However, in no instance did the fall in blood counts require treatment. Absolute granulocyte counts did not fall below 1000 in any patient. There was no significant difference between the two treatments in terms of either efficacy or toxicity. CONCLUSION: No justification has been found in this study for the recommendation of 89Sr over the considerably less expensive oral 32P for the palliation of skeletal pain from metastases of advanced cancer.

Single-dose oral Naproxen ( Naprosyn ) for acute postoperative pain: a quantitative systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Naproxen ( Naprosyn ) and Naproxen ( Naprosyn ) sodium are non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs used in a variety of painful conditions, including the treatment of postoperative pain. This review aims to assess the efficacy, safety and duration of action of a single oral dose of Naproxen ( Naprosyn )/Naproxen ( Naprosyn ) sodium for moderate to severe acute postoperative pain in adults, compared with placebo. METHODS: The Cochrane Library (issue 4 2002), EMBASE, PubMed, MEDLINE and an in-house database were searched for randomised, double blind, placebo controlled trials of a single dose of orally administered Naproxen ( Naprosyn ) or Naproxen ( Naprosyn ) sodium in adults with acute postoperative pain. pain relief or pain intensity data were extracted and converted into dichotomous information to give the number of patients with at least 50% pain relief over 4 to 6 hours. Relative benefit and number-needed-to-treat were then calculated. The percentage of patients with any adverse event, number-needed-to-harm, and time to remedication were also calculated. RESULTS: Ten trials with 996 patients in met the inclusion criteria. Six trials compared Naproxen ( Naprosyn ) sodium 550 mg (252 patients) with placebo (248 patients); the NNT for at least 50% pain relief over six hours was 2.6 (95% confidence interval 2.2 to 3.2). There was no significant difference between the number of patients experiencing any adverse event on treatment compared with placebo. Weighted mean time to remedication was 7.6 hours for Naproxen ( Naprosyn ) sodium 550 mg (206 patients) and 2.6 hours for placebo (205 patients). Four other trials used lower doses. CONCLUSION: A single oral dose of Naproxen ( Naprosyn ) sodium 550 mg is an effective analgesic in the treatment of acute postoperative pain. A low incidence of adverse events was found, although these were not reported consistently.

Motor cortex stimulation as treatment of trigeminal neuropathic pain.

A report is given on first experiences with motor cortex stimulation in 10 patients with different forms of neuropathic pain. Three of them had central pain as sequelae of cerebrovascular disease. In none of them did the stimulation provide pain relief. Two patients had pain from peripheral nerve injuries. One did not respond, but the other obtained about 50% pain relief. The remaining 5 patients with trigeminal neuropathy experienced definite pain relief varying between 60 and 90%. During test stimulation most patients had one or two short-lasting generalized seizures. But no one had any motor effects after permanent implantation. Motor cortex stimulation appears to be a new and promising possibility of pain treatment, especially in cases with trigeminal neuropathy, but many problems have yet to be solved, before a clear indication could be given.

(214) Rofecoxib Provides Superior Relief of Pain in Osteoarthritis (OA) Compared to Celecoxib.

We performed a randomized, double-blind, clinical trial to evaluate pain relief efficacy of rofecoxib and celecoxib at highest indicated once daily doses in osteoarthritis. 1082 patients meeting entry criteria for OA, responsive to NSAIDs, were randomized 3:3:1 to treatment with rofecoxib 25 mg QD (n = 471), celecoxib 200 mg QD (n = 460) or placebo (n = 151). Efficacy was assessed over the first 6 days of therapy and at weeks 2, 4 and 6 by WOMAC questionnaire and patient global assessment of response to therapy (PGART). Demographics were well balanced. Significantly more patients on placebo discontinued prematurely compared to both active groups (p < 0.001) mainly due to lack of pain relief efficacy. Rofecoxib provided statistically superior relief of night pain (p = 0.023), morning stiffness (p = 0.002), rest pain (p = 0.023), and walking pain (p = 0.005) compared to celecoxib. Rofecoxib was significantly superior to celecoxib on all WOMAC subscales including pain (p = 0.008), stiffness (p = 0.001) and physical function (p = 0.01). Rofecoxib was superior to celecoxib in % of patients with good or excellent PGART over 6 weeks (p = 0.014) and provided quicker onset of pain relief as assessed by time to first report of good or excellent response (p < 0.001). Both active groups were superior to placebo on efficacy endpoints. Incidence of clinical AEs, drug related AEs, serious AEs, and discontinuations due to AEs was similar between active groups. In this study, once daily doses of rofecoxib provided superior relief of pain and other related symptoms in OA compared to celecoxib and placebo. All treatments were generally well tolerated.

Anesthetic pain management in Siriraj Hospital: a retrospective review.

Neural blockade has been used as the single method to anesthetize a part of the body or used in combination with general anesthesia to lessen perioperative pain. Currently, nerve blocks are used for diagnostic, prognostic, therapeutic and prophylactic proposes for management of chronic, acute and cancer pain in a Pain Clinic. Reviewing the records of the 3,349 patients at Siriraj Pain Clinic, we found 2,662 and 687 cases had chronic and acute pain problems respectively, and only 646 patients were treated with anesthetic interventions during 1990 to 1998. They consisted of 317 male and 329 female. The techniques included stellate ganglion block, paravertebral nerve block, celiac plexus block, hypogastric plexus block, mesenteric plexus block, sacral nerve block, epidural steroid, lumbar sympathectomy, first and second thoracic sympatholysis, facet joints injection, sacroiliac joint injection, intravenous regional block with guanethidine or ketanserin, continuous opioid infusion, intravenous lidocaine infusion, and a phentolamine test. The common problems of pain included brachial plexus injury, chronic spinal pain, herpetic neuralgia, ischemic pain, central post-stroke pain, and causalgia. This retrospective review showed that 38 per cent of them reported 50 per cent pain relief with temporary effect. 34 per cent experienced good and satisfactory pain relief while 9 per cent reported excellent pain relief. 17 per cent did not gain benefit from any technique of pain relief and about 2 per cent could not be evaluated due to they did not return for follow-up. One serious complication after thoracic sympatholysis was brachial plexus injury. The neural blockade is proven to be one of the useful adjunct in the management of chronic pain but the selection of the technique is subjected to its critical appraisal.

Palliative care education and training during residency: a survey among residents at a tertiary care hospital.

BACKGROUND: Palliative care is the active total care of patients in advanced and incurable stages of cancer. More than 70% of all cancer patients in India require palliative care for relief of pain, other symptoms and psychosocial distress. The need for education and training in palliative care has been emphasized by the World Health Organization (WHO) during the past 15 years. This survey aimed to assess the awareness, clinical knowledge, and education and training aspects of palliative care among the clinical residents of a tertiary care hospital. METHODS: During January and February 1999, a total of 100 residents were asked to respond to a questionnaire on palliative care education and training during residency. The questionnaire consisted of 10 questions (each question with 3 different responses). Awareness regarding palliative care was assessed by 3 questions; clinical knowledge by 4 questions; and education and training obtained during residency by 3 questions. Comparisons were made using the Chi-square test between the oncology and non-oncology resident groups. RESULTS: Forty-nine residents (23 oncology and 26 non-oncology) responded to the survey. Awareness that palliative care involves active total care was lacking in 8 (16%) residents. The cost of palliative care in India was considered high by 17 (65%) non-oncology residents and 21 (43%) of the whole group. Hospice, as the right place for palliative care, was chosen by 14 (61%) oncology and 3 (11.5%) non-oncology residents (p = 0.0003). In the whole group, 21 (43%) believed that palliative care could be provided on an outpatient basis. Pain, depression and cachexia were identified as the most distressing symptoms of patients with incurable cancer. Seventeen (83%) oncology and 4 (15%) non-oncology residents (p = 0.000) knew how to use the WHO step-ladder for cancer pain relief. All oncology residents and 10 (38%) non-oncology residents preferred the oral route for providing medications for pain relief (p = 0.0001). The didactic education and training imparted during residency was considered as 'not enough' by 39% of oncology and 62% of non-oncology residents (51% overall). The confidence to deliver quality palliative care was lacking in 43% and 58% of oncology and non-oncology residents, respectively. CONCLUSION: Clinicians in India need to be provided focused skills and training for them to be able deliver quality palliative care to the large number of patients with incurable cancer. The cost of palliative care and the optimum place to deliver it, the symptoms of advanced cancer, pain relief and symptom control methods and quality of life in end-stage cancer patients are some aspects that should be an integral part of clinical residency programmes.

Home epidural analgesic infusion for non-cancer pain.

Continuous epidural analgesic infusion is widely recognized to be helpful for pain relief in the patient with cancer pain, but it can be as beneficial for the patient with non-cancer pain. Cancer pain patients have been offered long-term epidural infusion for relief of chronic pain, but non-cancer pain patients have less frequently been provided the same opportunities for pain relief. Both patient outcome and cost-effectiveness must dictate treatments offered as alternatives to long-term use of oral or injectables, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatories and muscle relaxants. It is necessary for nurses practicing in pain management and home health settings to understand the anatomy, neuropharmacology and nursing implications in order to effectively care for this growing population of patients. Epidural infusion is a safe and effective route of pain relief if the medical criteria as been met for choosing the patients receiving the treatment, and if the caregivers understand the treatment and expected outcomes. This article discusses anatomic considerations in drug selection, physiology, patient selection, neuropharmacology and patient care for epidural infusion. This article is designed to assist the nurse in accomplishing the patient and physician goals in this treatment modality for chronic non-cancer pain.

Symposium on Surface Replacement Arthroplasty of the Hip. Socket and cup surface replacement.

pain relief is the most striking feature following this procedure. In Group I, in which the metal acetabular socket and the metal femoral cup were used, 60 per cent of the patients gained satisfactory pain relief at five to nine years of follow-up. In Group II, in which the metal-polyethylene socket and the metal cup were used, 84 per cent of the patients gained satisfactory pain relief, with 1 to 5 years of follow-up. There have been 12 revision cases in the 130 hips operated on, with the average time to revision being 3 years and 10 months. Revision procedures consisted of the conventional total hip replacement (seven cases), replacement of the socket and/or the cup (four cases), and arthrodesis (one case). The secondary operations could be performed without difficulties, probably because no bone cement was used in our surface replacement. No cases of pulmonary embolism, thrombophlebitis, deep infection, heterotopic ossification, or femoral neck fracture were encountered after the procedure.