Pain management for the cancer patient - current practice and future developments

Analysis and relationship between the volume of upper limb lymphoedema and pressure pain threshold, neural range of motion, pain intensity, kinesiophobia, pain hypervigilance and catastrophizing in breast cancer survivors

BACKGROUND

Lymphedema of the upper limbs and persistent pain are frequent sequelae after surgical treatment of breast cancer.

AIM

The aim of this paper was to analyze the upper limb volume, pressure pain threshold, neural range of motion, pain intensity, kinesiophobia, pain hypervigilance and catastrophizing in patients with and without lymphoedema after breast cancer surgery. Secondly, we aimed to investigated the association between upper limb volume and these variables.

DESIGN

Descriptive observational study.

SETTING

Faculty of Health Sciences of the University of Granada.

POPULATION

Fifty-eight post-surgical breast cancer survivors, 29 with upper limb lymphoedema and 29 without lymphoedema.

METHODS

We measured upper limb volume (perimetric method). Also, pressure pain thresholds were assessed with a digital algometer, neural range of motion (neurodynamic test for radial, ulnar and median nerves), pain intensity (visual analogue scale), kinesiophobia, pain hypervigilance and catastrophizing (validated tests). To detect differences between the groups for the measurement variables we performed a t-test for independent samples analysis. A simple linear regression analysis adjusting for age and body mass index was performed to check the association among upper limb volume and pain variables in the group with lymphoedema.

RESULTS

The analysis showed that lymphoedema group had lower pressure pain threshold bilaterally in the masseter (origin P≤0.036; insertion P≤0.046), temporalis (insertion P≤0.021), suboccipitalis (P≤0.036); second (P≤0.014), third (P≤0.001) and tenth rib (P≤0.001); affected side of the temporalis (origin P=0.025); temporomandibular joint (P=0.024); neural range of motion in the median nerve (P=0.047), ulnar (P=0.042) on the affected side and radial (P=0.039) on the unaffected side; and greater kinesiophobia (P=0.042). Linear regression analysis only showed a significant association between upper limb volume and neural range of motion in the radial nerve (P=0.020) in the lymphedema group. No significant associations were obtained for the rest of variables.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that the presence of lymphoedema may contribute to an increased level of generalized mechanosensitivity and fear to movement in this population.

CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT

Upper limb lymphedema can lead to heightened mechanosensitivity and movement-related fear in breast cancer survivors. Therefore, fast track rehabilitation approach should be focus in screening and rehabilitation methods for detection and control this sequalae.

Opioid use prior to total knee replacement: comparative analysis of trends in England and Sweden

OBJECTIVES

To describe and compare trends in the frequency of opioid prescribing/dispensing in English and Swedish patients with osteoarthritis prior to total knee replacement (TKR).

METHODS

49,043 patients from an English national database (Clinical Practice Research Datalink) and 5,955 patients from the Swedish Skåne Healthcare register undergoing TKR between 2015 and 2019 were included, alongside 1:1 age-, sex-, and practice (residential area) matched controls. Annual prevalence and prevalence rates ratio (PRR) of opioid prescribing/dispensing (any, by strength) in the 10 years prior to TKR (or matched index date for controls) were estimated using Poisson regression.

RESULTS

In England and Sweden, the prevalence of patients with osteoarthritis receiving any opioid prior to TKR increased towards the date of surgery from 24% to 44% in England and from 16% to 33% in Sweden. Prescribing in controls was stable, resulting in an increasing PRR (1.6-2.7) between 10 and 1 years prior to index date in both countries. No relevant cohort or period effect was observed in either country. Prevalence of opioid prescribing was higher in English cases and controls; weaker opioids were more commonly prescribed in England, stronger opioids in Sweden.

CONCLUSIONS

Temporal prevalence patterns of opioid prescribing between cases and controls are similar in England and Sweden. Opioids are still commonly used in TKR cases in both countries highlighting the lack of valid alternatives for OA pain management.

A Stepped-Wedge Randomized Controlled Trial: Effects of eHealth Interventions for Pain Control Among Adults With Cancer in Hospice

CONTEXT

Unrelieved cancer pain at the end of life interferes with achieving patient-centered goals.

OBJECTIVE

To compare effects of usual hospice care and PAINRelieveIt® on pain outcomes in patients and their lay caregivers.

METHODS

In a five-step, stepped-wedge randomized, controlled study, 234 patients (49% male, 18% Hispanic, 51% racial minorities) and 231 lay caregivers (26% male, 20% Hispanic, 54% racial minorities) completed pre-pain/post-pain measures. They received usual hospice care with intervention components that included a summary of the patient's pain data, decision support for hospice nurses, and multimedia education tailored to the patient's and lay caregiver's misconceptions about pain.

RESULTS

The intervention effect on analgesic adherence (primary outcome) was not significant. Post-test worst pain intensity was significantly higher for the experimental group, but the difference (0.70; CI = [0.12, 1.27]) was not clinically meaningful. There was nearly universal availability of prescriptions for strong opioids and adjuvant analgesics for neuropathic pain in both groups. Lay caregivers' pain misconceptions (0-5 scale) were significantly lower in the experimental group than the usual care group (mean difference controlling for baseline is 0.38; CI = [0.08, 0.67]; P = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

This randomized controlled trial was a negative trial for the primary study outcomes but positive for a secondary outcome. The trial is important for clearly demonstrating the feasibility of implementing the innovative set of interventions.

Adequacy of Pain Control in Patients With Advanced Cancer in Pakistan

PURPOSE:

Pain is highly prevalent in advanced cancer and requires aggressive management. However, pain management in cancer is minimally investigated in Pakistan. This cross-sectional study explores the adequacy of pain management in patients with advanced stage cancer in Pakistan.

METHOD:

From January 2017 to May 2017, a cross-sectional study was conducted at Mayo Hospital, Lahore, Pakistan. A total of 218 patients with cancers were interviewed, and 136 patients with pain ≥5 on a Numerical Rating Scale for pain were included in the study. Demographic of patients and clinical characteristics of tumors were also evaluated.

RESULTS:

Only about one-third of the patients with advanced cancer reported adequate pain management. Chi-square test, χ² (1, n = 136) = 33.038, P < .05, indicated that pain scores were inversely associated with pain control; inadequate pain control was observed in patients with higher pain score and vice versa. Of the 55.88% of patients who were prescribed morphine, only 6 patients were compliant with treatment recommendations. Most patients were prescribed nonopioid medications and tramadol and codeine, which are weak opioid medications.

CONCLUSION:

The rate of undertreatment of cancer pain in Pakistan is alarming. Inadequate clinicians' training, patients' and caregivers' beliefs, lack of availability of opioid medications, and socioeconomic factors are some of the barriers to effective pain control. A multidisciplinary team approach is necessary to follow the World Health Organization pain ladder guidelines for the treatment of cancer pain.

Anaesthetic challenges in cancer patients: current therapies and pain management

THE OBJECTIVE

The aim is to present the major effects of cancer treatment (chemotherapy, radiotherapy, surgery) that the anaesthesiologist should consider preoperatively, and to review techniques of the analgesic management of the disease.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

To summarize the major challenges that cancer patients present for the anaesthesiologists, a literature review was conducted. Articles presenting evidence or reviewing the possible effects of anaesthetics on cancer cells were also included. Online databases of Science Direct, PubMed, and ELSEVIER, as well as reference lists of included studies were searched. Articles published from 2005 to 2016 were selected.

RESULTS

Anaesthesiologists should pay attention to patients receiving chemotherapy and its side effects on organ systems. Bleomycin causes pulmonary damage, anthracyclines are cardiotoxic, and platinum-based chemotherapy agents are nephrotoxic. A lot of chemotherapy agents lead to abnormal liver function, vomiting, diarrhoea, etc. Surgery itself is suspected to be associated with an increased risk of metastasis and recurrence of cancer. Regional anaesthesia and general anaesthesia with propofol should be used and volatile agents should be avoided to prevent cancer patients from perioperative immunosuppression that leads to increased risk of cancer recurrence. Pain management for palliative patients remains a major problem.

CONCLUSIONS

To provide the best treatment for cancer patients, cooperation of anaesthesiologists with oncologists and surgeons becomes imperative. It has been established that anaesthetic techniques and drugs could minimize the perioperative inflammation. However, further research of the perioperative "onco-anaesthetic" is needed.

[Improving the quality of cancer pain management in palliative care unit: Targeted clinical audit]

Goal This study aims to assess the quality of the cancer pain management in Palliative care unit.

METHOD

The method used was the targeted clinical audit. The audit grid was built according to the recommendations of the pilot Committee, and tested until the final version with 19 items was obtained. In this retrospective study, 60 consecutive patients were studied on 2 periods of time. The first one (T1) shows the gap between the patient's chart and the expected standard, and proposes corrective measures. The second one (T2) re-assesses, using the same items list, the efficacy of these measures.

RESULTS

After the corrective measures, the patients' medical record documentation was significantly improved at T2 for: neuropathic pain assessment improved, from 3% (T1) to 67% (T2) (P<0.001), so did pain assessment during the titration, from 6.7% (T1) to 90% (T2) (P<0.001). The overdoses symptoms assessment improved from 17% at T1 to 93% at T2, (P=0.002) and breakthrough pain evaluation improved from 3% at T1 to 73% at T2, (P<0.001). The pain reassessment after the rescue doses improved from 10% at T1 to 73% at T2 (P<0.001). The other points improved but not significantly.

CONCLUSION

The quality of the pain cancer management was improved during the audit, but some points (patient education and in patient medical record documentation) can be improved. We need to continue to implement the improvement measures in our unit.

[Prevalence and management of pain in patients with metastatic cancer in Franche-Comté]

INTRODUCTION

Pain management is a major public health problem, especially in oncology. In order to assess professional practice, the IRFC-FC conducted a survey amongst patients with metastatic osteophilic solid tumor in Franche-Comté. The aims were to assess the pain prevalence, and its characteristics, its management and its impact on patients' quality of life in patients in pain.

METHODS

An observational, prospective and multicenter survey was conducted using a self-report questionnaire. Patients with metastatic breast or prostate cancer managed in 5 day-hospitals of the IRFC-FC over a period of three months were included.

RESULTS

Two hundred thirty-three questionnaires were analyzed. Pain prevalence rate was 48.5%. Three quarters of patients in pain had chronic background pain, moderate to severe, with or without breakthrough pain. Considering their pain intensity and their analgesic therapy, 42.0% of patients seem to have an inadequate treatment. Eighty-five percent of treated patients reported to be compliant and felt that their pain was well managed despite a strong impact on their quality of life.

CONCLUSION

The setting of a specific clinical pathway is essential to secure the standardized, optimal and efficient management of patients in pain. The assessment of patient satisfaction and quality of life must be integrated in clinical practice to identify patients in pain for which the treatment is inappropriate.

[Prevalence and aetiopathogenesis of neuropathic pain in elderly cancer patients]

The prevalence of neuropathic pain is difficult to estimate as most studies evaluating chronic pain do not differentiate neuropathic from nociceptive pain. There are only a few studies of neuropathic pain in the elderly, specifically in the oncology population. This article is a non-systematic review of the relevant evidence on the prevalence and aetiopathogenesis of neuropathic cancer pain in the elderly.

Cancer pain management: Implications for psychologists

Aim

Pain is a common and a complex experience among patients with cancer. The purpose of this review is to provide a rational for a psychologist’s role in cancer pain management and a guide for doing so based on an examination of the current cancer pain literature.

Method

A literature review was conducted using the search terms: “cancer pain” AND “nonpharmacological interventions”, “cancer pain”, and “pain management” AND “cancer pain”. Peer-reviewed articles (published between 2000-2015) in which the authors had access to the full-linked text, books, and websites were included.

Results

A total of 451 hits were returned of which 53 were relevant and considered for this review. These were then organized into the following topics: complex cancer pain syndromes, current cancer physiological therapies, the multifactorial model of cancer pain, psychosocial assessment and interventions, barriers to treatment, and clinical implications that impact the future of behavioural interventions as part of cancer treatment.

Conclusion

Each patient with cancer has a unique pain experience that is shaped by biopsychosocial factors. Because of this, using a multidimensional and multidisciplinary approach is needed to optimize treatment outcomes. To maximize their role, psychologists need to help facilitate this process and to address any attitude and/or knowledge shortcomings they may have.

Pain management of the cancer patient

INTRODUCTION

Cancer pain is one of the most important symptoms of malignant disease, which has a major impact on the quality of life of cancer patients. Therefore, it needs to be treated appropriately after a careful assessment of the types and causes of pain.

AREAS COVERED

The mainstay of cancer pain management is systemic pharmacotherapy. This is, in principle, still based on the WHO guidelines initially published in 1986. Although these have been validated, they are not evidence-based. The principles are a stepladder approach using non-opioids, weak and then strong opioids. In addition, adjuvants can be added at any step to address specific situations such as bone or neuropathic pain. Patients, even if they are on long-acting opioids, need to be provided with immediate-release opioids for breakthrough pain. In case of inefficacy or severe adverse effects of one opioid, rotation to another opioid is recommended.

EXPERT OPINION

There is a major need for more and better randomized controlled trials in the setting of cancer pain as the lack of evidence is hampering the improvement of current treatment guidelines.

Neuropathic cancer pain: What we are dealing with? How to manage it?

Cancer pain is a serious health problem, and imposes a great burden on the lives of patients and their families. Pain can be associated with delay in treatment, denial of treatment, or failure of treatment. If the pain is not treated properly it may impair the quality of life. Neuropathic cancer pain (NCP) is one of the most complex phenomena among cancer pain syndromes. NCP may result from direct damage to nerves due to acute diagnostic/therapeutic interventions. Chronic NCP is the result of treatment complications or malignancy itself. Although the reason for pain is different in NCP and noncancer neuropathic pain, the pathophysiologic mechanisms are similar. Data regarding neuropathic pain are primarily obtained from neuropathic pain studies. Evidence pertaining to NCP is limited. NCP due to chemotherapeutic toxicity is a major problem for physicians. In the past two decades, there have been efforts to standardize NCP treatment in order to provide better medical service. Opioids are the mainstay of cancer pain treatment; however, a new group of therapeutics called coanalgesic drugs has been introduced to pain treatment. These coanalgesics include gabapentinoids (gabapentin, pregabalin), antidepressants (tricyclic antidepressants, duloxetine, and venlafaxine), corticosteroids, bisphosphonates, N-methyl-D-aspartate antagonists, and cannabinoids. Pain can be encountered throughout every step of cancer treatment, and thus all practicing oncologists must be capable of assessing pain, know the possible underlying pathophysiology, and manage it appropriately. The purpose of this review is to discuss neuropathic pain and NCP in detail, the relevance of this topic, clinical features, possible pathology, and treatments of NCP.