French-Canadian Translation and Cultural Adaptation of the Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale: The COWS-FC.

OBJECTIVE: The main objective of the present study was to develop a French-Canadian translation and adaptation of the COWS (i.e., the COWS-FC) for the assessment of opioid withdrawal symptoms in clinical and research settings. METHODS: The French-Canadian translation and cultural adaptation of the COWS was performed following guidelines for the translation and cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. The steps consisted of (1) initial translation from English to French, (2) synthesis of the translation, (3) back-translation from French to English, (4) expert committee meeting, (5) test of the prefinal version among healthcare professionals and (6) review of final version by the expert committee. The expert committee considered four major areas where the French-Canadian version should achieve equivalence with the original English-version of the COWS. These areas were (1) semantic equivalence; (2) idiomatic equivalence; (3) experiential equivalence and (4) conceptual equivalence. RESULTS: Rigorous steps based on the guidelines for the translation and cultural adaptation of assessment tools were followed, which led to a semantically equivalent version of the COWS. After a pretest among healthcare professionals, members from the expert committee agreed upon slight modifications to the French-Canadian version of the COWS to yield a final COWS-FC version. CONCLUSIONS: A French-Canadian translation and adaptation of the COWS (i.e., the COWS-FC) was developed. The COWS-FC could be used for the assessment of opioid withdrawal symptoms in clinical and research settings.

Does Point-of-Care Ultrasonography Improve Clinical Outcomes in Emergency Department Patients With Undifferentiated Hypotension? An International Randomized Controlled Trial From the SHoC-ED Investigators.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Point-of-care ultrasonography protocols are commonly used in the initial management of patients with undifferentiated hypotension in the emergency department (ED). There is little published evidence for any mortality benefit. We compare the effect of a point-of-care ultrasonography protocol versus standard care without point-of-care ultrasonography for survival and clinical outcomes. METHODS: This international, multicenter, randomized controlled trial recruited from 6 centers in North America and South Africa and included selected hypotensive patients (systolic blood pressure <100 mm Hg or shock index >1) randomized to early point-of-care ultrasonography plus standard care versus standard care without point-of-care ultrasonography. Diagnoses were recorded at 0 and 60 minutes. The primary outcome measure was survival to 30 days or hospital discharge. Secondary outcome measures included initial treatment and investigations, admissions, and length of stay. RESULTS: Follow-up was completed for 270 of 273 patients. The most common diagnosis in more than half the patients was occult sepsis. We found no important differences between groups for the primary outcome of survival (point-of-care ultrasonography group 104 of 136 patients versus standard care 102 of 134 patients; difference 0.35%; 95% binomial confidence interval [CI] -10.2% to 11.0%), survival in North America (point-of-care ultrasonography group 76 of 89 patients versus standard care 72 of 88 patients; difference 3.6%; CI -8.1% to 15.3%), and survival in South Africa (point-of-care ultrasonography group 28 of 47 patients versus standard care 30 of 46 patients; difference 5.6%; CI -15.2% to 26.0%). There were no important differences in rates of computed tomography (CT) scanning, inotrope or intravenous fluid use, and ICU or total length of stay. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the first randomized controlled trial to compare point-of-care ultrasonography to standard care without point-of-care ultrasonography in undifferentiated hypotensive ED patients. We did not find any benefits for survival, length of stay, rates of CT scanning, inotrope use, or fluid administration. The addition of a point-of-care ultrasonography protocol to standard care may not translate into a survival benefit in this group.

The Medication Quantification Scale 4.0: An Updated Index Based on Prescribers' Perceptions of the Risk Associated With Chronic Pain Medications.

To quantify risks associated with drug utilization in the real world for the treatment of chronic pain (CP), an index called the Medication Quantification Scale (MQS) was developed in 1992 in the United States and last updated in 2003. This study aimed to update, adapt to the contemporary Canadian context, and validate a revised version of the MQS (the MQS-4.0). Step 1: An expert committee adapted the MQS to the Canadian clinical practice context. Step 2: An update of risk weights given to medication subclasses was achieved using a prescriber survey (weights were derived from median 0-10 scores given to each subclass). Step 3: Construct validity of the MQS-4.0 was assessed after applying risk weights to the medication use profile of persons living with CP covered by public drug insurance plan. Thirty-six medication subclasses were included in the MQS-4.0. A total of 207 prescribers (physicians, pharmacists, and nurse practitioners) participated in the perception survey; 10.63% identified as pain specialists. When risk weights were applied to prescription claims (n = 9,122), the MQS-4.0 score was associated (P < .05) with the MQS-III score and variables associated with polypharmacy (eg, Charlson Comorbidity Index, number of prescribers or health care visits). This study provides an updated index intended for adult populations based on prescribers' perceptions of the risk associated with CP medications that can be useful for clinical practice and research among persons living with CP in Canada. It will, however, be relevant to verify whether similar risk weights are obtained in future pain specialist surveys. PERSPECTIVE: The MQS-4.0 is an update of the MQS used for quantifying the risk associated with the use of analgesics/coanalgesics. Adequate psychometrics properties were found.

Pain Medications Used by Persons Living With Fibromyalgia: A Comparison Between the Profile of a Quebec Sample and Clinical Practice Guidelines.

Background: Pharmacological management of fibromyalgia is complex. Chronic pain management is characterized by off-label prescribing and use, multimorbidity, and polypharmacy. Aims: This study aimed to describe pain medications use and perceived risk among people living with fibromyalgia and compare this use to evidence-based recommendations. Methods: Directive telephone interviews were conducted with 63 individuals self-reporting a diagnosis of fibromyalgia (Quebec, Canada). The questionnaire addressed specific questions about their pain and pharmacological treatments currently used for pain management (prescribed and over-the-counter). Collected data were compared to the Canadian Fibromyalgia Clinical Practice Guidelines and to evidence reports published by recognized organizations. Results: Despite a lack of robust scientific evidence to support opioids use to manage pain in fibromyalgia, 33% of our sample reported using them. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were used by 54.0% of participants, although this medication is not recommended due to lack of efficacy. Tramadol, which is recommended, was used by 23.8% of participants. Among the medications strongly recommended, anticonvulsants were used by 36.5%, serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor antidepressants by 55.6%, and tricyclic antidepressants by 22.2%. Cannabinoids (17.5%) and medical cannabis (34.9%) use were also reported. For all of these medication subclasses, no differences were found between participants not reporting (n = 35) or reporting (n = 28) more than one pain diagnosis (P < 0.05). Medication subclasses considered most at risk of adverse effects by participants were the least used. Conclusions: Results reveal discordance between evidence-based recommendations and medications use, which highlights the complexity of pharmacological treatment of fibromyalgia.

Contexte: La prise en charge pharmacologique de la fibromyalgie est complexe. La prise en charge de la douleur chronique est caractérisée par la prescription et l'utilisation non conforme de médicaments, la multimorbidité et la polypharmacothérapie.Objectifs: Cette étude visait à décrire l'utilisation de médicaments contre la douleur et le risque perçu chez les personnes atteintes de fibromyalgie, et à comparer cette utilisation aux recommandations fondées sur des données probantes.Méthodes: Des entretiens téléphoniques directifs ont été menés auprès de 63 personnes ayant déclaré avoir reçu un diagnostic de fibromyalgie (Québec, Canada). Le questionnaire abordait des questions précises sur leur douleur et les traitements pharmacologiques actuellement utilisés pour la prise en charge de leur douleur (prescrits et vendus sans ordonnance). Les données recueillies ont été comparées aux Lignes directrices canadiennes sur la fibromyalgie et aux rapports de données probantes publiés par des organisations reconnues.Résultats: Malgré l'absence de données probantes robustes à l'appui de l'utilisation des opioïdes pour la prise en charge la douleur chez les personnes atteintes de fibromyalgie, 33 % de notre échantillon a déclaré les utiliser. Les anti-inflammatoires nonstéroïdiens étaient pour leur part utilisés par 54,0 % des participants, bien que ce médicament ne soit pas recommandé en raison d'un manque d'efficacité. Le tramadol, recommandé, était utilisé par 23,8 % des participants. Parmi les médicaments fortement recommandés, les anticonvulsivants étaient utilisés par 36,5 % desparticipants, les antidépresseurs inhibiteurs de la recapture de la sérotonine et de la noradrénaline par 55,6 % des participants, et les antidépresseurs tricycliques par 22,2 % d'entre eux. La consommation de cannabinoïdes (17,5 %) et de cannabis médical (34,9 %) ont également été signalées. Pour toutes ces sous-classes de médicaments, aucune différence n'a été trouvée entre les participants ne signalant pas (n = 35) ou signalant (n = 28) plus d'un diagnostic de douleur (P < 0,05). Les sous-classes de médicaments considérées par les participants comme les plus à risque d'effets indésirables étaient les moins utilisées.Conclusions: Les résultats révèlent une discordance entre les recommandations fondées sur des données probantes et l'utilisation de médicaments, ce qui met en évidence la complexité du traitement pharmacologique de la fibromyalgie.

Prevalence and relevance of pain in older persons.

SETTING: With the ageing of the world's population, any health problem which adversely affects quality of life in older persons becomes increasingly salient. Persistent pain is one of the most prevalent health conditions faced by adults of advanced age, and is recognized as a major concern for this segment of the population. RESULTS: Numerous epidemiologic surveys suggest that pain is most common during the late middle-aged phase of life (55-65 years) and continues at approximately the same prevalence into older age (65+). This is true regardless of the anatomical site or the pathogenic cause of pain. The one exception appears to be pain associated with degenerative joint disease (e.g., osteoarthritis) which shows an exponential increase until at least 90 years of age. Common age associated conditions like dementia may result in a reduced frequency and intensity of pain. Daily pain is a major risk factor for developing disability and the oldest age cohorts are most vulnerable. Discretionary and higher order physical activities appear most affected, while basic activities of daily living may be modified but are rarely ceased altogether. Similar relationships have been documented for risk of depression and mood disturbance in older persons with persistent pain. Despite such well characterized adverse impacts, pain often remains poorly treated in older persons. This occurs across all health care settings examined (i.e., emergency, acute, outpatient, long-term care). CONCLUSION: Improved knowledge for both health professionals and patients, addressing the current research gaps and expansion of age-appropriate pain management services will be required to better meet the needs of our rapidly ageing population.

Educational needs of health care providers working in long-term care facilities with regard to pain management.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of chronic pain ranges from 40% to 80% in long-term care facilities (LTCF), with the highest proportion being found among older adults and residents with dementia. Unfortunately, pain in older adults is underdiagnosed, undertreated, inadequately treated or not treated at all. A solution to this problem would be to provide effective and innovative interdisciplinary continuing education to health care providers (HCPs). OBJECTIVE: To identify the educational needs of HCPs working in LTCF with regard to pain management. METHODS: A qualitative research design using the nominal group technique was undertaken. Seventy-two HCPs (21 physicians/pharmacists, 15 occupational/physical therapists, 24 nurses and 21 orderlies) were recruited from three LTCF in Quebec. Each participant was asked to provide and prioritize a list of the most important topics to be addressed within a continuing education program on chronic pain management in LTCF. RESULTS: Forty topics were generated across all groups, and six specific topics were common to at least three out of the four HCP groups. Educational need in pain assessment was ranked the highest by all groups. Other highly rated topics included pharmacological treatment of pain, pain neurophysiology, nonpharmacological treatments and how to distinguish pain expression from other behaviours. CONCLUSION: The present study showed that despite an average of more than 10 years of work experience in LTCF, HCPs have significant educational needs in pain management, especially pain assessment. These results will help in the development of a comprehensive pain management educational program for HCPs in LTCF.

Multimodal Interventions Including Rehabilitation Exercise for Older Adults With Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analyses of Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Musculoskeletal disorders (MSKDs) are the most common causes of disabilities for older adults. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to assess the effectiveness of multimodal interventions including exercise rehabilitation for older adults with chronic MSKDs. METHODS: A literature search was conducted up to February 2019 in 5 bibliographical databases to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared multimodal interventions including exercise rehabilitation with usual medical care or no intervention. Randomized controlled trials were assessed with the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. Meta-analyses were performed and pooled mean differences (MDs) or standardized mean differences (SMDs) were calculated. RESULTS: Sixteen RCTs (n = 2322 participants) were included. One RCT was considered at low risk of bias, 8 had some concerns of bias, and 7 had a high risk of bias. Participants suffered from hip or knee osteoarthritis (OA) (n = 12 RCTs), low back pain (LBP) (n = 2 RCTs) and generalized chronic pain (GCP) (n = 2 RCTs). Multimodal interventions were significantly more effective than usual care to decrease pain (visual analog scale, out of 10 points) in the short term, MD: -0.71 (95% confidence interval [CI] -1.08 to -0.34, n = 900), and in the long term: MD: -0.52 (95% CI -0.98 to -0.05, n = 575), but these differences are not considered clinically important. In terms of disabilities, multimodal interventions were also significantly more effective than usual care. The SMDs were -0.47 (95% CI -0.61 to -0.34, n = 903) and -0.29 (95% CI -0.46 to -0.13, n = 568) for OA trials in the short and long terms, respectively, and -0.47 (95% CI -0.81 to -0.12, n = 211) for LBP and GCP trials in the short term. The magnitude of these effects may be considered as small to moderate. CONCLUSION: Multimodal intervention including exercise rehabilitation combined with usual medical care is an efficacious therapeutic option to reduce disabilities in older adults with chronic MSKDs. A significant but not clinically important effect was observed for pain. The most beneficial component of the multimodal interventions in terms of education, exercises, or medication remains to be determined.

Sonographic Findings of Left Ventricular Dysfunction to Predict Shock Type in Undifferentiated Hypotensive Patients: An Analysis From the Sonography in Hypotension and Cardiac Arrest in the Emergency Department (SHoC-ED) Study.

Introduction Patients that present to the emergency department (ED) with undifferentiated hypotension have a high mortality rate. Hypotension can be divided into four categories: obstructive, hypovolemic, distributive, and cardiogenic. While it is possible to have overlapping or concomitant shock states, being able to differentiate between cardiogenic shock and the other categories is important as it entails a different treatment regime and extra cautions. In this secondary analysis, we investigate if using focused cardiac ultrasonography (FOCUS) to determine left ventricular dysfunction (LVD) can serve as a reliable test for cardiogenic shock. Methods We prospectively collected FOCUS findings performed in 135 ED patients with undifferentiated hypotension as part of an international study. Patients with clearly identified etiologies for hypotension were excluded, along with other specific presumptive diagnoses. LVD was defined as the identification of a generally hypodynamic left ventricle in the setting of shock. FOCUS findings were collected using a standardized protocol and data collection form. All scans were performed by emergency physicians trained in ultrasound. Final shock type was defined as cardiogenic or noncardiogenic by independent specialist blinded chart review. Results In our findings, 135 patients had complete records for assessment of left ventricular function and additional follow-up data and so were included in this secondary analysis. The median age was 56 years and 53% of patients were male. Disease prevalence for cardiogenic shock was 12% and the mortality rate was 24%. The presence of LVD on FOCUS had a sensitivity of 62.50% (95% confidence interval 35.43% to 84.80%), specificity of 94.12% (88.26% to 97.60%), positive likelihood ratio (LR) 10.62 (4.71 to 23.95), negative LR 0.40 (0.21 to 0.75) and accuracy of 90.37% (84.10% to 94.77%) for detecting cardiogenic shock. Conclusion Detecting left ventricular dysfunction on FOCUS may be useful in the early identification of cardiogenic shock in otherwise undifferentiated hypotensive adult patients in the emergency department.

Weekly SARS-CoV-2 screening of asymptomatic kindergarten to grade 12 students and staff helps inform strategies for safer in-person learning.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission in K-12 schools was rare during in 2020-2021; few studies included Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)-recommended screening of asymptomatic individuals. We conduct a prospective observational study of SARS-CoV-2 screening in a mid-sized suburban public school district to evaluate the incidence of asymptomatic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), document frequency of in-school transmission, and characterize barriers and facilitators to asymptomatic screening in schools. Staff and students undergo weekly pooled testing using home-collected saliva samples. Identification of >1 case in a school prompts investigation for in-school transmission and enhancement of safety strategies. With layered mitigation measures, in-school transmission even before student or staff vaccination is rare. Screening identifies a single cluster with in-school staff-to-staff transmission, informing decisions about in-person learning. The proportion of survey respondents self-reporting comfort with in-person learning before versus after implementation of screening increases. Costs exceed $260,000 for assays alone; staff and volunteers spend 135-145 h per week implementing screening.

French-Canadian translation of a self-report questionnaire to monitor opioid therapy for chronic pain: The Opioid Compliance Checklist (OCC-FC).

Context: Chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) is a frequent condition among Canadians. The psychosocial and economic costs of CNCP for individuals, their families, and society are substantial. Though opioid therapy is often used to manage CNCP, it is also associated with risks of misuse. The Opioid Compliance Checklist (OCC) was developed to monitor opioid misuse in patients taking opioids for CNCP. The objective of the present study was to provide a French-Canadian translation of the eight-item OCC, the OCC-FC. Methods: The eight-item OCC was translated for use in Québec using published guidelines for the translation and adaptation of self-report measures, including an expert committee and a double forward-backward translation process. A pretest of the adapted eight-item OCC was also conducted among 30 patients with CNCP. Results: A French-Canadian version of the OCC was generated. When ambiguity in the items was detected during expert committee consultation or pretest administration, modifications made were kept to a strict minimum to facilitate future comparisons across studies using the original English and translated French-Canadian version. Discussion: This study provides a culturally adapted tool that will contribute to identifying French-Canadian patients with CNCP who misuse opioids over the course of opioid therapy. This translation of the OCC has the strong potential to be useful in research and clinical settings.

Contexte: La douleur chronique non cancéreuse est une affection fréquente chez les Canadiens. Les coûts psychosociaux et économiques de la douleur chronique non cancéreuse pour les individus, leurs familles et la société sont considérables. Si le traitement opioïde est souvent utilisé pour la prise en charge de la douleur chronique non cancéreuse, il est également associé à des risques de mauvais usage. La liste de vérification de l'observance du traitement opioïde (OCC) a été élaborée pour surveiller le mauvais usage des opioïdes chez les patients prenant des opioïdes pour la douleur chronique non cancéreuse. L'objectif de la présente étude était de fournir une traduction canadienne-française de l'OCC en 8 points, le OCC-FC.Méthodes: L'OCC en 8 points a été traduit pour être utilisé au Québec selon les lignes directrices publiées pour la traduction et l'adaptation des mesures autorapportées, y compris un comité d'experts et un double processus de traduction - rétrotraduction. Un prétest de l'OCC en 8 points adapté a également été réalisé auprès de trente patients atteints de douleur chronique non cancéreuse.Résultats: Une version canadienne française de l'OCC a été produite. Lorsqu'une ambiguïté dans les énoncés a été détectée par 'lors de la consultation avec le comité d'experts ou de l'administration du prétest, les modifications apportées ont été maintenues au strict minimum afin de faciliter les comparaisons futures entre les études utilisant la version originale anglaise et la version canadienne-française traduite.Discussion: Cette étude fournit un outil culturellement adapté qui contribuera à répertorier les patients canadiens français atteints de douleur chronique non cancéreuse qui font un mauvais usage des opioïdes au cours de leur traitement. Cette traduction de l'OCC présente un grand potentiel d'utilité dans la recherche et les milieux cliniques.

Does Point of Care Ultrasound Improve Resuscitation Markers in Undifferentiated Hypotension? An International Randomized Controlled Trial From The Sonography in Hypotension and Cardiac Arrest in the Emergency Department (SHoC-ED) Series.

Introduction Point of Care Ultrasound (PoCUS) protocols are commonly used to guide resuscitation for patients with undifferentiated hypotension, yet there is a paucity of evidence for any outcome benefit. We undertook an international multicenter randomized controlled trial (RCT) to assess the impact of a PoCUS protocol on key clinical outcomes. Here we report on resuscitation markers.  Methods Adult patients presenting to six emergency departments (ED) in Canada and South Africa with undifferentiated hypotension (systolic blood pressure (SBP) <100mmHg or a Shock Index >1.0) were randomized to receive a PoCUS protocol or standard care (control). Reported physiological markers include shock index (SI), and modified early warning score (MEWS), with biochemical markers including venous bicarbonate and lactate, at baseline and four hours.  Results A total of 273 patients were enrolled, with data collected for 270. Baseline characteristics were similar for each group. Improvements in mean values for each marker during initial treatment were similar between groups: Shock Index; mean reduction in Control 0.39, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.44 vs. PoCUS 0.33, 0.29 to 0.38; MEWS, mean reduction in Control 2.56, 2.22 to 2.89 vs. PoCUS 2.91, 2.49 to 3.32; Bicarbonate, mean reduction in Control 2.71 mmol/L, 2.12 to 3.30 mmol/L vs. PoCUS 2.30 mmol/L, 1.75 to 2.84 mmol/L, and venous lactate, mean reduction in Control 1.39 mmol/L, 0.93 to 1.85 mmol/L vs. PoCUS 1.31 mmol/L, 0.88 to 1.74 mmol/L. Conclusion We found no meaningful difference in physiological and biochemical resuscitation markers with or without the use of a PoCUS protocol in the resuscitation of undifferentiated hypotensive ED patients. We are unable to exclude improvements in individual patients or in specific shock types.

Does Point-of-care Ultrasonography Change Emergency Department Care Delivered to Hypotensive Patients When Categorized by Shock Type? A Post-Hoc Analysis of an International Randomized Controlled Trial from the SHoC-ED Investigators.

Introduction Our previously reported randomized-controlled-trial of point-of-care ultrasound (PoCUS) for patients with undifferentiated hypotension in the emergency department (ED) showed no survival benefit with PoCUS. Here, we examine the data to see if PoCUS led to changes in the care delivered to patients with cardiogenic and non-cardiogenic shock. Methods A post-hoc analysis was completed on a database of 273 hypotensive ED patients randomized to standard care or PoCUS in six centres in Canada and South Africa. Shock categories recorded one hour after the ED presentation were used to define subcategories of shock. We analyzed initial intravenous fluid volumes, as well as rates of inotrope use and procedures. Results  261 patients could be classified as cardiogenic or non-cardiogenic shock types. Although there were expected differences in the mean fluid volume administered between patients with non-cardiogenic and cardiogenic shock (p-value<0.001), there was no difference between the control and PoCUS groups (mean non-cardiogenic control 1881mL (95% CI 1567-2195mL) vs non-cardiogenic PoCUS 1763mL (1525-2001mL); and cardiogenic control 680mL (28.4-1332mL) vs. cardiogenic PoCUS 744mL (370-1117mL; p= 0.67). Likewise, there were no differences in rates of inotrope administration nor procedures for any of the subcategories of shock between the control group and PoCUS group patients. Conclusion Despite differences in care delivered by subcategory of shock, we did not find any difference in key elements of emergency department care delivered between patients receiving PoCUS and those who did not. This may help explain the previously reported lack of outcome differences between groups.

Prevalence and characteristics of chronic pain in patients admitted to an outpatient drug and alcohol treatment program.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the prevalence, characteristics, and correlates of chronic pain in a population of predominantly employed, alcoholic patients attending an outpatient drug and alcohol treatment program. METHODS: A pain survey was administered to 79 patients attending an outpatient drug and alcohol treatment program situated in a suburban community outside of New York City. Chronic severe pain was defined as pain that 1) had persisted for at least 6 months; and 2) was either moderate to severe in intensity or significantly interfered with daily activities. RESULTS: Seventy-six percent of patients experienced pain during the past week. Chronic severe pain was experienced by 29.1% of patients. High levels of pain interference with physical and psychosocial functioning were reported by 26.1%. Patients with chronic severe pain were more likely to have significant comorbidity, to cite physical pain as the impetus for alcohol or drug abuse, to have abused a prescription drug or used an illicit drug to treat pain during the prior 3 months, and to have used illicitly obtained opioids. Only 13% of patients with chronic severe pain were currently receiving pain treatment and 72% expressed interest in receiving treatment. DISCUSSION: Chronic severe pain was prevalent in this predominantly employed, alcoholic population attending an outpatient drug and alcohol treatment program. Pain was associated with significant functional impairment, medical and psychiatric comorbidities, and abuse behaviors. Few patients accessed adequate pain treatment. Efforts should be made to better address the pain problems in this patient population.

An interdisciplinary expert consensus statement on assessment of pain in older persons.

This paper represents an expert-based consensus statement on pain assessment among older adults. It is intended to provide recommendations that will be useful for both researchers and clinicians. Contributors were identified based on literature prominence and with the aim of achieving a broad representation of disciplines. Recommendations are provided regarding the physical examination and the assessment of pain using self-report and observational methods (suitable for seniors with dementia). In addition, recommendations are provided regarding the assessment of the physical and emotional functioning of older adults experiencing pain. The literature underlying the consensus recommendations is reviewed. Multiple revisions led to final reviews of 2 complete drafts before consensus was reached.

Identifying heavy health care users among primary care patients with chronic non-cancer pain.

Objective: The objective of this study was to identify biopsychosocial factors predicting primary care chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) patients' risk of being heavy health care users. Methods: Patients reporting moderate to severe CNCP for at least 6 months with an active analgesic prescription from a primary care physician were recruited in community pharmacies. Recruited patients completed questionnaires documenting biopsychosocial characteristics. Using administrative databases, direct costs were estimated for health care services used by each patient in the year preceding and following the recruitment. Heavy health care users were defined as patients in the highest annual direct health care costs quartile. Logistic multivariate regression models using the Akaike information criterion were developed to identify predictors of heavy health care use. Results: The median annual direct health care cost incurred by heavy health care users (n = 63) was CAD (Canadian dollars) 7627, versus CAD 1554 for standard health care users (n = 188). The final predictive model of the risks of being a heavy health care user included pain located in the lower body (odds ratio [OR] = 3.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.20-7.65), pain-related disability (OR = 1.24; 95% CI, 1.03-1.48), and health care costs incurred in the year prior to recruitment (OR = 17.67; 95% CI, 7.90-39.48). Variables in the model also included sex, comorbidity, patients' depression level, and attitudes toward medical pain cure. Conclusion: Patients suffering from CNCP in the lower body and showing greater disability were more likely to be heavy health care users, even after adjusting for previous-year direct health care costs. Improving pain management for these patients could have positive impacts on health care use and costs.

Objectif: Déterminer les facteurs biopsychosociaux prédictifs du risque d'être un grand utilisateur de services de santé chez les patients souffrant de douleur chronique non cancéreuse (DCNC) suivis en soins de première ligne.Méthodologie: Des patients souffrant d'une DCNC modérée à sévère depuis au moins six mois et bénéficiant d'une ordonnance d'analgésique valide donnée par un médecin de famille ont été recrutés dans des pharmacies communautaires. Les patients recrutés ont ensuite complété des questionnaires documentant leurs caractéristiques biopsychosociales. À l'aide de bases de données administratives, les coûts directs des services de santé utilisés par chaque patient au cours de l'année précédant et suivant son recrutement ont été estimés. Les grands utilisateurs de soins de santé ont été définis comme les patients faisant partie du quartile le plus élevé de coûts directs annuels en soins de santé. Des modèles de régression logistique multivariée utilisant le critère d'information Akaike ont été élaborés afin de déterminer les facteurs prédictifs de grande utilisation des soins de santé.Résultats: Le coût direct annuel médian en soins de santé chez les grands utilisateurs de soins de santé (n = 63) était de 7 627 CAD comparativement à 1 554 CAD pour les utilisateurs de soins de santé réguliers (n = 188). Le modèle prédictif final du risque d'être un grand utilisateur de soins de santé comprenait la douleur au niveau des membres inférieurs (rapport de cotes (RC) = 3,03; intervalle de confiance (IC) à 95 %: 1,20 ­ 7,65), la réduction de la capacité fonctionnelle liée à la douleur (RC = 1,24; IC à 95 %: 1,03 ­ 1,48) et les coûts directs en soins de santé au cours de l'année précédant le recrutement (RC = 17,67; IC à 95 %: 7,90 ­ 39,48). Les variables « sexe ¼, « comorbidité ¼, « dépression ¼ et « attitudes envers la guérison médicale ¼ étaient également retenues dans le modèle.Conclusion: Les patients souffrant de DCNC au niveau des membres inférieurs et présentant une détérioration de la capacité fonctionnelle liée à la douleur étaient plus susceptibles d'être de grands utilisateurs des soins de santé, même après ajustement pour le coût direct en soins de santé pendant l'année précédente. L'amélioration de la prise en charge de la douleur chez ces patients pourrait avoir des répercussions positives sur l'utilisation et le coût des soins de santé.

Measurement of QTc in patients receiving chronic methadone therapy.

Recent reports suggest that methadone may prolong the QTc interval and cause torsades de pointes. This study was conducted to evaluate the prevalence of QTc prolongation during oral methadone therapy and identify factors associated with prolongation. Patients receiving oral methadone as treatment for chronic pain or addiction were eligible for the study. One hundred four patients who were receiving > or = 20 mg methadone per day for > or = 2 weeks underwent electrocardiograms to measure QTc interval duration. Sixty-three (61%) patients were male and 63 (61%) were receiving methadone maintenance for opioid addiction. The mean (+/- SD) age was 45.3 +/- 9.4 years. The median (range) methadone dose was 110 mg/day (20-1200 mg/day); median (range) number of months on methadone was 12.5 months (1-444 months). The median (range) QTc interval was 428 msec (396-494 msec). Thirty-three percent had QTc prolongation (males 40%, females 20%; P=0.03). No patient had a QTc longer than 500 msec. Significant dose response was observed in males on methadone <12 months (rho=0.60, P=0.02). Our study suggests that methadone may prolong the QTc interval in specific subpopulations but poses little risk of serious prolongation.

Management of fibromyalgia in older adults.

Fibromyalgia (FM) is a pain syndrome characterized by dysregulation of pain-processing mechanisms. FM may arise de novo or evolve following nervous system sensitization after an identifiable triggering event or related to a peripheral pain generator such as osteoarthritis. Although the focus symptom of FM is generalized body pain, patients may also experience sleep and mood disturbance, fatigue, and other somatic symptoms leading to the concept of a polysymptomatic condition. In view of prevalent other comorbidities in older patients, FM may be overlooked and management may be neglected, thereby contributing to poor well-being. Pertinent to the older patient is to ensure that the diagnosis of FM is correct and that other conditions are not misdiagnosed as FM. Whereever possible, treatment strategies should emphasize non-pharmacologic interventions that encompass healthy lifestyle habits, with attention to adequate physical activity in particular. Drug treatments should be tailored to the individual needs of the patient, with knowledge that they may offer only a modest effect, but with caution to ensure that adverse effects do not overshadow therapeutic effects.

Costs of moderate to severe chronic pain in primary care patients - a study of the ACCORD Program.

BACKGROUND: The economic burden of chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) remains insufficiently documented in primary care. PURPOSE: To evaluate the annual direct health care costs and productivity costs associated with moderate to severe CNCP in primary care patients taking into account their pain disability. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients reporting noncancer pain for at least 6 months, at a pain intensity of 4 or more on a 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain) intensity scale, and at a frequency of at least 2 days a week, were recruited from community pharmacies. Patients' characteristics, health care utilization, and productivity losses (absenteeism and presenteeism) were documented using administrative databases, pharmacies' renewal charts, telephone, and self-administered questionnaires. Patients were stratified by tertile of pain disability measured by the Brief Pain Inventory questionnaire. RESULTS: Patients (number =483) were, on average, 59 years old, mainly women (67.5%), and suffered from CNCP for a mean of 12 years at an average pain intensity of 6.5±1.9. The annual direct health care costs and productivity costs averaged CAD $9,565 (±$13,993) and CAD $7,072 (±$11,716), respectively. The use of complementary health care services accounted for almost 50% of the direct health care costs. The mean adjusted total direct health care costs (considering pain-related hospitalizations only) and productivity costs increased with more pain disability: low disability, CAD $12,118; moderate, CAD $18,278; and severe, CAD $19,216; P=0.001. CONCLUSION: The economic burden of CNCP is substantial and increases with the level of pain disability, which suggests the need for and potential benefits of improving CNCP management through specific and adapted treatment plans targeting the impact of pain on daily functioning.

Pharmacotherapeutic management of chronic noncancer pain in primary care: lessons for pharmacists.

PURPOSE: Describe the pharmacotherapeutic management of primary-care patients with chronic noncancer pain, assess their satisfaction with pain treatment, and identify the determinants of their satisfaction. METHODS: A cohort study was conducted in Quebec (Canada). Patients reporting chronic noncancer pain with an average pain intensity of at least 4 on a 0-10 scale (10= worst possible pain) and having an active analgesic prescription from a primary-care physician were recruited. They completed a telephone interview and a self-administered questionnaire to document their pain, emotional well-being, satisfaction with treatment, and barriers/beliefs/attitudes about pain and its treatment. Information on pharmacotherapy was based on an administrative provincial database and pharmacies' charts. Determinants of patients' satisfaction were identified using multivariate linear regression models. RESULTS: Four hundred and eighty six patients participated. Their mean age was 58.4 years and they had had pain for a mean of 11.7 years (standard deviation, ±11.1) at an average pain intensity of 6.5 in the past week. Although 90% reported adverse gastrointestinal effects, 36.4% and 54.4% of these patients took no over-the-counter or prescribed medication for constipation or nausea, respectively. On a scale from 0-100, the mean overall satisfaction score was 64.7 (95% confidence interval [CI] =63.5-65.9). Patient satisfaction was low, particularly regarding the "information about pain and its treatment" (mean 50.6; 95% CI =47.6-53.7) and "treatment efficacy" (mean 53.6; 95% CI =51.5-55.6) subscales. The overall treatment satisfaction score decreased with more pain disability, probable depression and anxiety, more barriers to pain treatment, higher incidence of nausea, and use of over-the-counter analgesics. CONCLUSION: In primary care, patients' level of satisfaction with their pain treatment is not optimal. This study underlines how the expanded scope of practice of community pharmacists may allow them to play a pivotal role in providing information, discussing barriers to pain treatment, and monitoring pain disability, and by appropriately managing pharmacotherapy to optimize effectiveness while minimizing adverse effects.

Knowledge, attitudes and beliefs about chronic noncancer pain in primary care: a Canadian survey of physicians and pharmacists.

BACKGROUND: Primary care providers' knowledge, attitudes and beliefs (KAB) regarding chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) are a barrier to optimal management. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate and identify the determinants of the KAB of primary care physicians and pharmacists, and to document clinician preferences regarding the content and format of a continuing education program (CEP). METHOD: Physicians and pharmacists of 486 CNCP patients participated. Physicians completed the original version of the KnowPain-50 questionnaire. Pharmacists completed a modified version. A multivariate linear regression model was developed to identify the determinants of their KAB. RESULTS: A total of 137 of 387 (35.4%) physicians and 110 of 278 (39.5%) pharmacists completed the survey. Compared with the physicians, the pharmacists surveyed included more women (64% versus 38%) and had less clinical experience (15 years versus 26 years). The mean KnowPain-50 score was 69.3% (95% CI 68.0% to 70.5%) for physicians and 63.8% (95% CI 62.5% to 65.1%) for pharmacists. Low scores were observed on all aspects of pain management: initial assessment (physicians, 68.3%; pharmacists, 65.4%); definition of treatment goals and expectations (76.1%; 61.6%); development of a treatment plan (66.4%; 59.0%); and reassessment and management of longitudinal care (64.3%; 53.1%). Ten hours of reported CEP sessions increased the KAB score by 0.3 points. All clinicians considered a CEP for CNCP to be essential. Physicians preferred an interactive format, while pharmacists had no clear preferences. CONCLUSION: A CEP to improve primary care providers' knowledge and competency in managing CNCP, and to reduce false beliefs and inappropriate attitudes regarding CNCP is relevant and perceived as necessary by clinicians.