A literature review of the impact of exclusion criteria on generalizability of clinical trial findings to patients with chronic pain

A Tele-Coaching Pilot Study: An Innovative Approach to Enhance Motor Skills in Adolescents With Down Syndrome

BACKGROUND

Limited knowledge exists regarding the effectiveness of training programmes for individuals with Down syndrome, particularly innovative approaches like tele-coaching. Our pilot study aimed to improve strength and balance using tele-coaching sessions in children with Down syndrome.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We enrolled 18 children and adolescents (aged 9-17 years) with Down syndrome. The intervention consisted of a training programme based on games and was conducted remotely through an online platform (e-gym) 3 days per week (15 weeks). Participants engaged in playful activities targeting limb strength and balance.

RESULTS

We found an improvement in systolic blood pressure (p = 0.04) and balance (p = 0.002). Our analysis showed a non-significant decrease in adiposity parameters, including weight, BMI, BMI z-score, WC and WC/H.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings contribute to evidence supporting online exercise interventions for individuals with Down syndrome. Integrating these interventions into community support programmes could enhance access to tailored services.

The Impact of Preoperative Combined Pectoserratus and/or Interpectoral Plane (Pectoralis Type II) Blocks on Opioid Consumption, Pain, and Overall Benefit of Analgesia in Patients Undergoing Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery: A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled, and Triple-blinded Trial

OBJECTIVE

Acute postoperative pain remains a major obstacle in minimally invasive cardiac surgery (MICS). Evidence of the analgesic benefit of chest wall blocks is limited. This study was designed to assess the influence of combined pectoserratus plane block plus interpectoral plane block (PSPB + IPPB) on postoperative pain and the overall benefit of analgesia compared with placebo.

DESIGN

A prospective, randomized, triple-blinded study was conducted.

SETTING

The setting was the operating room and intensive care unit of a university hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 60 patients undergoing elective right-lateral MICS were enrolled.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomly assigned to preoperative PSPB + IPPB with 30 mL of ropivacaine 0.5% or saline.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The primary endpoint was total intravenous morphine milligram equivalents administered in the first 24 hours after extubation. Secondary endpoints included the Overall Benefit of Analgesia Score (OBAS) at 24 hours after extubation and repeated Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Values for intravenous morphine milligram equivalents administered in the first 24 hours after extubation were significantly lower (median [interquartile range]: 4.2 mg [2.1 - 7.9] v 8.3 mg [4.2 - 15.7], p = 0.025; mean difference: 6.7 mg [0.94 - 12 mg], p = 0.024, Cohen's d: 0.64 [0.09 - 1.2]). Moreover, OBAS at 24 hours and VAS after extubation were significantly lower (4.0 [3.0 - 6.0] v 7.0 [3.0 - 9.0], p = 0.043; 0.0 cm [0.0 - 2.0] v 1.5 cm [0.3 - 3.0], p = 0.030). VAS did not differ between groups at later points.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative PSPB + IPPB reduced 24-hour postextubation opioid consumption, pain at extubation, and OBAS. Given its low risk and expedient placement, it could be a helpful addition to MICS protocols. Future studies should evaluate these findings in multicenter settings and further elucidate the optimal timing of block placement.

Impact of Erector Spinae Plane Blocks on Pain Management and Postoperative Outcomes in Patients with Chronic Pain Undergoing Spine Fusion Surgery: A Retrospective Cohort Study

PURPOSE

To evaluate the impact of bilateral ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane blocks (ESPBs) on pain and opioid-related outcomes in a surgical population with chronic pain.

METHODS

A retrospective, observational cohort study. Clinical data were extracted from the electronic medical records of patients who underwent lumbar fusion (February 2018 - July 2020). Eligible patients had a confirmed history/diagnosis of chronic pain starting >3 months before surgery and received either bilateral ESPBs or no ESPBs. Patients were matched on demographic variables (sex, age, race, BMI, ASA Classification, and preoperative opioid use) in a 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome was median opioid consumption (morphine equivalent dose, MED) 24 hours post-surgery (hydromorphone iv-PCA and oral). Secondary outcomes included Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) pain scores, opioid consumption up to 48 hours post-surgery, and hospital length of stay (LOS). Group differences were analyzed using bivariable and multivariable regression.

RESULTS

Of 72 patients, 36 received ultrasound-guided ESPBs and 36 did not. Baseline demographics showed no significant differences. On bivariable analysis, ESPBs were associated with significantly lower 24-hour opioid consumption (79 mg MED vs 116 mg MED, p=0.024) and shorter LOS (82 hours, 95% CI 51-106 vs 126 hours, 95% CI 101-167, p<0.001). No significant differences in NRS pain scores were found up to 48 hours post-surgery. Multivariable analysis confirmed significant reductions in 24-hour opioid consumption (-44, 95% CI -1.06 - -87.55, p=0.044), IV-PCA use (-22, 95% CI -1.59 - -56.77, p=0.038), and LOS (-38, 95% CI -10.074 - -66.22, p=0.008) in the ESPB group without differences in NRS pain scores.

CONCLUSION

ESPBs were associated with statistically and clinically significant reductions in 24-hour opioid consumption and LOS, without differences in NRS pain scores after spinal fusion in a chronic pain surgical cohort. Given these effects, patients with chronic pain may disproportionately benefit from ESPBs for spine surgery.

Interdisciplinary pain program participants with high catastrophizing scores improve function utilizing enriched therapeutic encounters and integrative health techniques: a retrospective study

Introduction

Pain catastrophizing describes helplessness, rumination, and magnification of a pain experience. High pain catastrophizing is an independent risk factor for disability, pain severity, inadequate treatment response, chronicity, and opioid misuse. Interdisciplinary pain programs (IPPs) are beneficial and cost-effective for individuals with chronic pain, but their functional impact on individuals with high pain catastrophizing is not well established. The emerging field of placebo studies suggests that patient-provider relationships, positive treatment expectations, and sociobiologically informed care trigger physiological responses that may enhance therapeutic interventions.

Methods

In this retrospective observational cohort study, we compared admission and discharge data for 428 adults with high-impact chronic pain (mean 8.5 years) who completed the Spaulding-Medford Functional Restoration Program (FRP). The interdisciplinary FRP team of physiatrists, behavioral health clinicians, physical therapists, and occupational therapists specializes in evidenced-based conventional rehabilitation, integrative health, and pain psychoeducation via enriched therapeutic encounters, fostering collaboration, validation, trust, self-efficacy, and positive expectations. Clinical outcome measures included the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) assessing functional performance (COPM-PS) and satisfaction with function (COPM-SS), the Pain Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), and the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9).

Results

FRP participants with clinically elevated catastrophizing at baseline (PCS ≥30, mean PCS 39) achieved statistically significant improvements in function (mean delta -2.09, CHI2 = 15.56, p < 0.001), satisfaction with function (COPM-SS mean delta -2.50, CHI2 = 7.42, p = 0.007), pain (NRS mean delta 2.7), mood (PHQ-9 mean delta 1.87, p = 0.002), and catastrophizing (PCS mean delta 4.16, p < 0.001). Subgroup analysis revealed racial disparities in pain scores, and exploratory analysis showed a trend toward reducing opiate consumption.

Discussion

Despite the known association of adverse outcomes with high catastrophizing, FRP participation was associated with increased productive engagement, reduced pain, reduced maladaptive thought processes, and improved mood. Although causation and efficacy cannot be established from a retrospective design, this is the first study to identify functional improvement in patients with high-impact chronic pain and clinically relevant high pain catastrophizing who participate in an IPP combining conventional and complementary rehabilitation with psychoeducation. These enriched therapeutic encounters may enhance the treatment process by promoting trust, empathy, collaboration, and beneficial reframing of patients' experiences, expectations, and goals.

Differences in time to patient access to innovative cancer medicines in six European countries

Patients across Europe face inequity regarding access to anticancer medicines. While access is typically evaluated through reimbursement status or sales data, patients can receive first access through early access programs (EAPs) or off-label use. This study aims to assess the time to patient access at the hospital level, considering different indications and countries. (Pre-)registered access to six innovative medicines (Olaparib, Niraparib, Ipilimumab, Osimeritinib, Nivolumab and Ibritunib) was measured using a cross-sectional survey. First patient access to medicines and indications were collected using the hospital databases. Nineteen hospitals from Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland and France participated. Analysis showed that some hospitals achieved patient access before national reimbursement, primarily through EAPs. The average time from EMA-approval to patient access for these medicines was 2.1 years (Range: -0.9-7.1 years). Hospitals in Italy and France had faster access compared to Hungary and Belgium. Variation was also found within countries, with specialized hospitals (x̄: -0.9 years; SD: 2.0) more likely to provide patient access prior to national reimbursement than general hospitals (x̄: 0.4 years; SD: 2.9). Contextual differences were observed, with EAPs or off-label use being more prevalent in Switzerland than Hungary. Recent EMA-approved indications and drug combinations reached patients at a later stage. Substantial variation in patient access time was observed between and within countries. Improving pricing and reimbursement timelines, fostering collaboration between national health authorities and market authorization holders, and implementing nationally harmonized, data-generating EAPs can enhance timely and equitable patient access to innovative cancer treatments in Europe.

The level of agreement between the numerical rating scale and visual analogue scale for assessing pain intensity in adults with chronic pain

The numerical rating scale and visual analogue scale are used to quantify pain intensity. However, it has not yet been explored whether these scores are interchangeable in adults with chronic pain. Data from the prospective multicentre cross-sectional INTERVAL study were used to evaluate the one-dimensionality and agreement between numerical rating scale scores and visual analogue scale scores in adults with chronic pain. Pain intensity scores using the numerical rating scale and visual analogue scale were provided by 366 patients with chronic pain for current, average, minimal and maximal pain. To evaluate whether pain intensity scales are completed in accordance with each other, the proportion of patients who satisfied the following condition was calculated: minimal pain intensity ≤ maximal pain intensity. A factor analysis confirmed the one-dimensionality of the pain measures. A significant difference was found between numerical rating scale and visual analogue scale scores for average, current, minimum and maximum pain. Intra-class correlation coefficient estimates ranged from 0.739 to 0.858 and all measures failed to show sufficient and acceptable agreement at the 95% level. The strength of agreement between pain severity categories was classified as 'moderate' for average and minimal pain and 'substantial' for current and maximal pain. The proportion of patients who scored minimal pain ≤ maximal pain was 97.5% for the numerical rating scale and 89.5% for the visual analogue scale. This study failed to show an acceptable agreement between the numerical rating scale and visual analogue scale when pain intensity was rated by adults with chronic pain, despite showing both scales measure the same information.

A toolkit for capturing a representative and equitable sample in health research

Research participants often do not represent the general population. Systematic exclusion of particular groups from research limits the generalizability of research findings and perpetuates health inequalities. Groups considered underserved by research include those whose inclusion is lower than expected based on population estimates, those with a high healthcare burden but limited research participation opportunities and those whose healthcare engagement is less than others. The REP-EQUITY toolkit guides representative and equitable inclusion in research. The toolkit was developed through a methodological systematic review and synthesis and finalized in a consensus workshop with 24 participants. The REP-EQUITY toolkit describes seven steps for investigators to consider in facilitating representative and equitable sample selection. This includes clearly defining (1) the relevant underserved groups, (2) the aims relating to equity and representativeness, (3) the sample proportion of individuals with characteristics associated with being underserved by research, (4) the recruitment goals, (5) the strategies by which external factors will be managed, (6) the methods by which representation in the final sample will be evaluated and (7) the legacy of having used the toolkit. Using the REP-EQUITY toolkit could promote trust between communities and research institutions, increase diverse participation in research and improve the generalizability of health research. National Institute for Health and Care Research PROSPERO identifier: CRD42022355391.

Pragmatic Comparative Effectiveness Trials and Learning Health Systems in Pain Medicine: Opportunities and Challenges

Large randomized clinical trials or aggregates of clinical trials represent the highest levels of clinical evidence because they minimize different sources of confounding and bias. The current review provides an in-depth discussion of the challenges faced and methods we can use to overcome these obstacles to tailor novel designs of pragmatic effectiveness trials to pain medicine. The authors describe their experiences with an open-source learning health system to collect high-quality evidence and conduct pragmatic clinical trials within a busy academic pain center.