Special considerations in managing pain and psychosocial distress in patients with opioid use disorder and cancer: the role of the supportive care and psycho-oncology interdisciplinary team.

People with a substance use disorder (SUD) have shortened lifespans due to complications from their substance use and challenges engaging with traditional health care settings and institutions. This impact on life expectancy is especially prominent in patients with co-occurring SUDs and cancer, and often has a much worse prognosis from the cancer than a similar patient without a SUD. Palliative care teams are experts in serious illness communication and symptom management and have become increasingly embedded in the routine care of patients with cancer. We argue that the skill set of palliative care teams is uniquely suited for addressing the needs of this oft marginalized group. We provide a comprehensive review of tools for addressing these needs, including medications that can both treat pain and opioid use disorder (OUD), and highlight psychosocial approaches to treating patients with OUD and cancer in a way that is respectful and effective. Using a trauma informed framework, we focus on the application of harm reduction principles from addiction medicine and the principles of clear communication, accompaniment, and emotional presence from palliative care to maximize support. We also focus on ways to reduce stigma in the delivery of care, by providing language that reduces barriers and increases patient engagement. Finally, we describe a clinic embedded within our institution's cancer center which aims to serve patients with cancer and SUDs, built on the framework of harm reduction, accompaniment and trauma informed care (TIC). Overall, we aim to provide context for addressing the common challenges that arise with patients with cancer and OUD, including the direct impact of psychosocial stress on substance use and cancer treatment, delays in disease directed treatment that can potentially impact further treatment options and outcomes, challenging pain management due to greater opioid debt, and potential loss of primary coping mechanism through substance use in the face of potential terminal diagnosis.

Effects of different exercise types and cycles on pain and quality of life in breast cancer patients: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: To determine the effect of different combinations of different exercise modalities with different training cycles on the improvement of quality of life and pain symptoms in breast cancer patients. METHODS: The databases PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Scopus were searched through a computer network with a search deadline of 23 August 2023. Two researchers independently screened the literature, extracted data and performed methodological quality assessment of the included literature, and then performed the corresponding statistical analyses and graphing using stata17.0. RESULTS: Thirty-six randomized control trial (RCT) studies involving 3003 participants and seven exercise modalities were included. Most of the exercise modalities improved patients' quality of life compared to usual care, with long-term aerobic combined with resistance exercise [SMD = 0.83,95% CI = 0.34,1.33,p = 0.001] and YOGA [SMD = 0.61,95% CI = 0.06,1.16,p = 0.029] treatments having a significant effect. For pain and fatigue-related outcome indicators, the treatment effect was not significant for all exercise modalities included in the analysis compared to the control group, but tended to be beneficial for patients. CONCLUSION: Long-term aerobic combined with resistance exercise was the most effective in improving quality of life and fatigue status in breast cancer patients, and aerobic exercise was more effective in improving pain symptoms in breast cancer patients.

Improving Pain Self-Management Among Rural Older Adults With Cancer.

Importance: Undertreated cancer pain is a major public health concern among older adults in rural communities. Interventions to improve pain management among this vulnerable population are needed. Objective: To test the feasibility, acceptability, and changes in pain outcomes from exposure to an adapted intervention, Cancer Health Empowerment for Living without Pain (CA-HELP), to improve patients' communication about pain to their clinicians. Design, Setting, and Participants: Older adults with cancer (aged ≥65 years) who were residing in a noninstitutional rural setting and receiving outpatient care at a rural-based clinic in Tennessee were enrolled in the study, in which everyone received the intervention, in May 2022. All patients were given assessments at baseline and 1 week after intervention. Mean score differences were analyzed using 1-tailed paired sample t tests (α = .05). Data were analyzed in June 2022. Exposure: The adapted version of CA-HELP included an 18-page patient-facing workbook and a 30-minute telephone coaching call with a registered nurse to coach patients on pain education and communication techniques to discuss pain with their medical team. Main Outcomes and Measures: Feasibility was examined through accrual and completion rates. Acceptability was measured by helpfulness, difficulty, and satisfaction with the intervention. Changes in outcomes were measured using mean score differences from pre-post assessments of pain self-management, self-efficacy for communicating with clinicians about pain, patient-reported pain, and misconceptions about pain. Results: Among the 30 total participants, the mean (SD) age was 73.0 (5.1) years; 17 participants (56.7%) were female, 5 (16.7%) were Black or African American, 30 (100%) were non-Hispanic or non-Latino, 24 (80.0%) were White, 16 (53.3%) had less than a high school education, and 15 (50.0%) reported income less than $21 000 per year. Based on accrual and completion rates of 100%, this intervention was highly feasible. Fidelity rates for delivering intervention components (100%) and communication competence (27 participants [90%]) were also high. Regarding acceptability, all patients rated the intervention as helpful, with the majority (24 participants [80%]) rating it as "very helpful." Most patients rated the intervention as "not at all difficult" (27 participants [90%]), enjoyed participating (21 participants [70%]), and reported being "very satisfied" (25 participants [83.3%]). Pre-post changes in outcomes suggested significant improvements in pain self-management and self-efficacy for communicating with clinicians about pain, as well as significant reductions in patient-reported pain and pain misconceptions. Conclusions and Relevance: In this case-series study of CA-HELP, results suggested the adapted version of CA-HELP was feasible and acceptable and showed changes in pain-related outcome measures among older adults with cancer in a rural setting.

Acceptability, Effectiveness, and Roles of mHealth Applications in Supporting Cancer Pain Self-Management: Integrative Review.

BACKGROUND:  Cancer pain remains highly prevalent and persistent throughout survivorship, and it is crucial to investigate the potential of leveraging the advanced features of mobile health (mHealth) apps to empower individuals to self-manage their pain. OBJECTIVE:  This review aims to comprehensively understand the acceptability, users' experiences, and effectiveness of mHealth apps in supporting cancer pain self-management. METHODS:  We conducted an integrative review following Souza and Whittemore and Knafl's 6 review processes. Literature was searched in PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL Plus with Full Text, PsycINFO, and Embase, from 2013 to 2023. Keywords including "cancer patients," "pain," "self-management," "mHealth applications," and relevant synonyms were used in the search. The Johns Hopkins research evidence appraisal tool was used to evaluate the quality of eligible studies. A narrative synthesis was conducted to analyze the extracted data. RESULTS:  A total of 20 studies were included, with the overall quality rated as high (n=15) to good (n=5). Using mHealth apps to monitor and manage pain was acceptable for most patients with cancer. The internal consistency of the mHealth in measuring pain was 0.96. The reported daily assessment or engagement rate ranged from 61.9% to 76.8%. All mHealth apps were designed for multimodal interventions. Participants generally had positive experiences using pain apps, rating them as enjoyable and user-friendly. In addition, 6 studies reported significant improvements in health outcomes, including enhancement in pain remission (severity and intensity), medication adherence, and a reduced frequency of breakthrough pain. The most frequently highlighted roles of mHealth apps included pain monitoring, tracking, reminders, education facilitation, and support coordination. CONCLUSIONS:  mHealth apps are effective and acceptable in supporting pain self-management. They offer a promising multi-model approach for patients to monitor, track, and manage their pain. These findings provide evidence-based insights for leveraging mHealth apps to support cancer pain self-management. More high-quality studies are needed to examine the effectiveness of digital technology-based interventions for cancer pain self-management and to identify the facilitators and barriers to their implementation in real-world practice.

A qualitative study of Samoan cancer patients' experiences.

METHODS: This qualitative interview study was part of a larger study that interviewed19 participants recruited among patients with cancer registered with Samoa Cancer Society, or patients recently discharged from the main tertiary hospital in Samoa. Interview transcripts were reviewed, and the research team identified the key palliative-care-related themes. RESULTS: Analysis led to the generation of the following key themes: living with pain; resource constraints; support from family and faith; and interactions with healthcare professionals. Most participants were experiencing unresolved pain as a result of poor health knowledge, lack of access to medications and practical issues, such as financial limitations and lack of transport. Participants also reported a lack of resources, including financial constraints, as a significant barrier to effective healthcare. Sources of support for patients with cancer were most commonly strong family relationships and religious faith. Although it was difficult for the participants to access care from healthcare professionals, they found that honest communication about their condition was comforting. However, they were frustrated if they felt communication was unsatisfactory. CONCLUSION: This study provides much needed evidence on the issues that affect the quality of life patients with cancer receiving palliative care and their families in Samoa. It also highlights the intersectionality of these issues and how this compounds the patient experience. Practical recommendations for improving palliative care lie in a few key areas, including a need for improved access to opioids and support for family caregivers. However, from a systemic perspective, the way forward should lie in harnessing the strengths of Samoan culture, including the strong sense of family and the role of religion, to provide support and care for palliative patients.

Virtual Reality for advanced cancer patients assisted at home: A randomized controlled interventional study.

OBJECTIVE: Virtual Reality (VR) has been demonstrated to be an effective option for integrating psychological interventions in different therapeutic settings. This randomized controlled interventional study aims to assess the effects of VR, compared to tablet controlled intervention, on anxiety, depression, pain, and short-term psychophysical symptoms in advanced cancer patients assisted at home. METHODS: Participants were provided with a VR headset or a tablet (TAB) for 4 days. On the first and last day, anxiety and depression were measured by Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and pain by Brief Pain Inventory. Before and after each VR and tablet session, symptoms were collected by the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS). RESULTS: Fifty-three patients (27 VR vs. 26 TAB) completed the study. Anxiety significantly decreased in the VR group after the 4-day intervention. The analysis of ESAS showed a significant improvement in pain (p = 0.013), tiredness (p < 0.001), and anxiety (p = 0.013) for TAB group, and a significant reduction in tiredness (p < 0.001) in the VR group. CONCLUSIONS: Technological and user-friendly tools, such as VR and tablets, might be integrated with traditional psychological interventions to improve anxiety and cancer-related short-term symptoms. Further studies are needed to better consolidate the possible beneficial effects of VR.

Virtual reality for pain management in hospitalized patients with cancer: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Hospitalized patients with cancer often experience acute and/or chronic pain. Although virtual reality (VR) has been extensively studied across a wide range of clinical settings, no studies have yet evaluated potential impact on pain management in this patient population. METHODS: Prospective randomized controlled trial at an urban academic hospital comparing VR against an active control to mitigate moderate-severe cancer disease and treatment-related pain. RESULTS: A total of 128 adult hospitalized patients with cancer (any tumor type) were randomized to 10 minutes of immersive VR distraction therapy or 10 minutes of two-dimensional guided imagery distraction therapy delivered by handheld tablet. Participants in the two arms were similar in age, sex, race, presence of metastatic disease, concurrent pain specialist consultation, and baseline opioid use. Although both groups experienced improved self-reported pain scores (primary outcome), those randomized to VR experienced significantly greater reduction in pain immediately after intervention compared with active control (p = .03). This difference was sustained for 24 hours as well (p = .004). Within-group analysis showed significant improvement in VR arm of pain bothersomeness (p = .05) and general distress (p = .03) as well. CONCLUSION: Among hospitalized adult patients with moderate-severe pain related to cancer and cancer therapies, VR provided more nonpharmacologic pain relief than active control and this benefit sustained long after conclusion of the intervention. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Virtual reality (VR), a developing technology that immerses the user in new environments, has been shown to improve pain in different patient populations. To test the role of VR in improving pain in hospitalized patients with cancer who report moderate-severe pain, we compared the impact of a 10-minute immersive VR intervention to that of a 10-minute two-dimensional guided imagery experience to improve self-reported pain scores. We found that, although both interventions improved pain, VR did so significantly more. Moreover, participants assigned to VR had sustained improvement in pain 24 hours later.

Cancer-related pain experienced in daily life is difficult to communicate and to manage - for patients and for professionals.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to gain qualitative insight into cancer patients' experiences, explanations, and management strategies regarding their cancer-related pain (CP). METHODS: Seventeen patients with CP were interviewed using a semi-structured interview approach. Braun and Clarke's thematic analysis method was used to analyze the transcribed interviews. The patients all participated in cancer rehabilitation courses arranged by the research clinic at The Danish Knowledge Centre for Rehabilitation and Palliative Care. RESULTS: Three themes were identified: (1) Explaining CP: Patients found it difficult to explain how they experienced their pain. They lacked words, and they frequently used invasive metaphors such as "Pain feels like a heart attack" (2). Strategies and barriers to the management of CP: Initiatives provided by healthcare professionals (HCPs) were perceived as insufficient, and the patients missed guidance in both pharmacological and non-pharmacological approaches to pain management. Several saw medicine as unnatural for their body, and they focused on side effects and the medicine affecting their quality of life. (3) Responsibility for managing CP: A lack of responsiveness from the HCPs and taking on responsibility for pain management were experienced by several of the patients. The patients expressed uncertainty about whom to contact for help with the management of their CP. CONCLUSION: The patients' difficulties in explaining, understanding, and communicating their pain and pain management contributed to insufficient pain management. They were also uncertain about who had the responsibility to help them to achieve pain relief. These results share the evidence drawn from studies on patients with chronic non-cancer pain. This qualitative study highlights the need for having more focus on a common language and shared understanding between patients and HCPs. It also underpins the importance of HCPs to assume their responsibility to help patients manage their pain conditions.

Quality of life, craniomandibular function, and psychosocial factors related to pain and movement in patients with head and neck cancer.

PURPOSE: To describe the characteristics of and the associations between health-related quality of life, pain, craniomandibular function, and psychosocial factors related to pain and fear of movement in patients with head and neck cancer. METHODS: Seventy-eight patients diagnosed with HNC were recruited. Measurements of the maximum mouth opening range and pressure pain thresholds on the masseter muscle and the distal phalanx of the thumb were conducted, as well as a battery of self-report questionnaires were administrated, including the QoL Questionnaire (EORT QLQ-H&N35), Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), the Spanish translation of the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia for Temporomandibular Disorders (TSK-TMD), and the short version of the Craniofacial Pain and Disability Inventory (CF-PDI-11). RESULTS: The study sample (66.7% men, mean age 60.12 [11.95] years) experienced a moderate impact on their QoL levels (57.68 [18.25] EORT QLQ-H&N35) and high kinesiophobia values (20.49 [9.11] TSK-TMD). Pain was present in 41% of the patients, but only 3.8% reported severe pain. 26.4% had a restricted mouth opening range, and 34.62% showed significant catastrophism levels. There were strong positive correlations between EORT QLQ-H&N35 and CF-PDI-11 (r = 0.81), between NRS and CF-PDI-11 (r = 0.74), and between PCS and CF-PDI-11 (r = 0.66). CONCLUSION: Patients with HNC experience negative effects in their QoL, related to their impairment in craniomandibular function. Fear of movement, pain intensity, and catastrophism are associated with poorer functionality; relationships that should be considered when attempting to improve health care.

Opioid Therapy for Cancer Pain in Vietnam: Knowledge, Attitudes, and Perceived Barriers Among Health Care Professionals, Policymakers, and Regulators.

PURPOSE: We aimed to assess knowledge, attitudes, and perceived barriers among health care professionals (HCPs), policymakers, and regulators in Vietnam related to opioid therapy for cancer pain. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study in Vietnam from June to August 2022. Participants completed a questionnaire on their demographic characteristics, knowledge and attitudes toward opioid therapy, and barriers to accessing opioids for cancer pain. RESULTS: Two hundred seven HCPs and 15 policymakers/regulators completed the questionnaire. Poor knowledge about opioids in cancer pain was found in 63.3% of HCPs and 80.0% of policymakers/regulators. Poor knowledge was associated with a lack of training in cancer pain management or palliative care (PC; prevalence ratio [PR], 1.14 [95% CI, 1.04 to 1.24]). Negative attitudes toward opioid therapy in cancer pain were held by 64.7% of HCPs and 80.0% of policymakers/regulators. Negative attitudes were associated with the unavailability of oral morphine in the workplace (PR, 1.10 [95% CI, 1.01 to 1.20]). The most common major barriers reported were the absence of national policy on pain management and PC (34.7%), inadequate training in opioid use for cancer pain (33.8%), lockdown of health facilities during the COVID-19 pandemic (32.4%), limited opioid availability in local health facilities (32.4%), and excessively restrictive regulation of opioid dispensing in pharmacies (32.4%). CONCLUSION: This study found a knowledge deficit and negative attitudes toward opioid therapy for cancer pain among HCPs and policymakers/regulators. Improving education and training in opioid therapy is essential. Recognizing major barriers can guide strategies to enhance safe opioid accessibility for cancer pain management in Vietnam.

Patients' satisfaction with cancer pain treatment at adult oncologic centers in Northern Ethiopia; a multi-center cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Patient satisfaction is an important indicator of the quality of healthcare. Pain is one of the most common symptoms among cancer patients that needs optimal treatment; rather, it compromises the quality of life of patients. OBJECTIVE: To assess the levels and associated factors of satisfaction with cancer pain treatment among adult patients at cancer centers found in Northern Ethiopia in 2023. METHODS: After obtaining ethical approval, a multi-center cross-sectional study was conducted at four cancer care centers in northern Ethiopia. The data were collected using an interviewer-administered structured questionnaire that included the Lubeck Medication Satisfaction Questionnaire (LMSQ). The severity of pain was assessed by a numerical rating scale from 0 to 10 with a pain score of 0 = no pain, 1-3 = mild pain, 4-6 = moderate pain, and 7-10 = severe pain Binary logistic regression analysis was employed, and the strength of association was described in an adjusted odds ratio with a 95% confidence interval. RESULT: A total of 397 cancer patients participated in this study, with a response rate of 98.3%. We found that 70.3% of patients were satisfied with their cancer pain treatment. Being married (AOR = 5.6, CI = 2.6-12, P < 0.001) and being single (never married) (AOR = 3.5, CI = 1.3-9.7, P = 0.017) as compared to divorced, receiving adequate pain management (AOR = 2.4, CI = 1.1-5.3, P = 0.03) as compared to those who didn't receive it, and having lower pain severity (AOR = 2.6, CI = 1.5-4.8, P < 0.001) as compared to those who had higher level of pain severity were found to be associated with satisfaction with cancer pain treatment. CONCLUSION: The majority of cancer patients were satisfied with cancer pain treatment. Being married, being single (never married), lower pain severity, and receiving adequate pain management were found to be associated with satisfaction with cancer pain treatment. It would be better to enhance the use of multimodal analgesia in combination with strong opioids to ensure adequate pain management and lower pain severity scores.

Pain Intensity and Satisfaction of Pain Relief in Discharged Cancer Patients: A Large Sample Study in China.

BACKGROUND: Many studies have focused on the quality of pain management in hospitalized patients with cancer pain, while what happens after discharge remains unclear. AIM: The purpose of this study was to investigate the pain intensity and satisfaction of pain relief among a large sample of Chinese patients with cancer pain after discharge. DESIGN: Cross-sectional, descriptive, correlational research. SETTINGS AND SAMPLE: ABOUT: 1,013 patients were recruited in a tertiary cancer hospital, and their residence addresses were distributed in 6 geographical regions, including 26 provinces, municipalities, and autonomous regions. METHODS: The 1,013 patients with cancer pain were discharged from the wards of a national cancer hospital in China from July 2020 to October 2021. A nurse in the pain clinic followed the patients based on a whole-process information system and collected the data after the cancer pain patients were discharged. The study methods followed the STROBE guidelines. RESULTS: The average age of 1,013 discharged patients was 61.30 (±12.56) years. Moderate and severe background pain (BGP) was reported in 749 patients (73.94%), and more than 3 instances of breakthrough pain (BTP) in the past 24 hours were reported in 541 patients (53.41%). More severe BGP was associated with more frequent BTP (p < .01). In addition, there were 572 patients (56.47%) whose satisfaction with pain relief was lower than 70%. More severe BGP was associated with a lower satisfaction degree (r = -0.796, p < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Pain among discharged Chinese patients with cancer is poorly managed, and there is a low degree of satisfaction with pain relief. Nurses can do more work to assist cancer patients in managing pain more effectively by ensuring they have a plan to report and manage pain after discharge.

Barriers to Pain Management as Perceived by Cancer and Noncancer Patients With Chronic Disease.

BACKGROUND: Pain is the most common symptom experienced by both cancer and non-cancer patients. A wide variety of barriers may hinder the optimal treatment of cancer and noncancer pain that are related to the health care system, health care providers, and patients. PURPOSE: To explore the barriers to pain management as perceived by patients with cancer and noncancer chronic diseases. METHOD: A descriptive, cross-sectional correlational design was employed to recruit a sample of 200 patients (n = 100 patients with cancer, n= 100 patients with noncancer) from two hospitals in Jordan. Patients filled out an Arabic version of Barriers Questionnaire II (ABQ-II). RESULTS: Harmful effects of medications were the greatest barrier to effective pain management, while fatalism had the lowest mean scores. Age was negatively correlated with physiological effects (r = -0.287, p < .01), communication (r = -0.263, p < .01), harmful effects (r = -0.284, p < .01), and the overall barrier score (r = -0.326, p < .01) among noncancer patients with chronic disease and (p > .05) for patients with cancer. Patients with cancer had higher mean scores (M = 2.12, SD = 0.78) in the fatalism subscale than those with noncancer chronic disease (M = 1.91, SD = 0.68), while patients with noncancer chronic disease had significantly higher mean scores (M = 2.78, SD = 0.78) in the communication subscale than patients with cancer (M = 2.49, SD = 0.65), (t = -2.899, p = .005). CONCLUSION: To improve the quality of care for patients who are in pain, it is recommended to address pain management barriers as they arise.

Pain coping, multidisciplinary care, and mHealth: Patients' views on managing advanced cancer pain.

OBJECTIVE: Pain is common among people with advanced cancer. While opioids provide significant relief, incorporating psycho-behavioral treatments may improve pain outcomes. We examined patients' experiences with pain self-management and how their self-management of chronic, cancer-related pain may be complemented by behavioral mobile health (mHealth) interventions. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with patients with advanced cancer and pain. Each participant reviewed content from our behavioral mHealth application for cancer pain management and early images of its interface. Participants reflected on their experiences self-managing cancer pain and on app content. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using a combination of inductive and deductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Patients (n = 28; 54% female; mean age = 53) across two geographic regions reported using psychological strategies (e.g., reframing negative thoughts, distraction, pain acceptance, social support) to manage chronic cancer-related pain. Patients shared their perspectives on the integration of psycho-behavioral pain treatments into their existing medical care and their experiences with opioid hesitancy. Patient recommendations for how mHealth interventions could best support them coalesced around two topics: 1.) convenience in accessing integrated pharmacological and psycho-behavioral pain education and communication tools and 2.) relevance of the specific content to their clinical situation. CONCLUSIONS: Integrated pharmacological and psycho-behavioral pain treatments were important to participants. This underscores a need to coordinate complimentary approaches when developing cancer pain management interventions. Participant feedback suggests that an mHealth intervention that integrates pain treatments may have the capacity to increase advanced cancer patients' access to destigmatizing, accessible care while improving pain self-management.

Overcoming Patient Pain Together: Breast Cancer Patients and Caregivers' Pretreatment Psychosocial Distress Linked to Patients' Pain Interference During the First Year of Treatment.

Breast cancer patients experience treatment-related pain from surgery, radiation, chemotherapy, and long-term hormonal treatment, which can lead to poorer outcomes. Patient and family caregivers' psychosocial distress exacerbates patient pain interference, but this has not been directly examined among breast cancer patients in dyadic models longitudinally. Guided by a biopsychosocial framework, the Biobehavioral Family Model, we explore how multiple reports of patient pain interference across the first year of treatment are linked to the patient (N = 55) and caregiver (N = 55) pretreatment psychosocial distress (eg, depression, anxiety, marital satisfaction, family relationship quality). Specifically, we find that breast cancer patients' pain interference increases and then decreases over the first year of treatment. Additionally, caregivers' pretreatment anxiety was associated with increased patient pain interference over time (B = .19, SE = .07, P = .008), while patients' pretreatment psychosocial distress was not associated with a change in their pain interference. Yet, looking at clinically specific times during the first year of treatment, we find that caregiver-reported higher marital satisfaction is associated with lower patient-reported pain interference later in treatment (6 months: B = -.58, SE = .24, P = .017; 12 months: B = -.82, SE = .23, P < .001). We conclude that, per the Biobehavioral Family Model, pretreatment patient and caregiver psychosocial distress is linked to patient pain interference during the first year of breast cancer treatment. Thus, caregivers' psychosocial distress (ie, anxiety and marital satisfaction) may be a particularly important target in future dyadic behavioral intervention strategies to reduce breast cancer patient pain. PERSPECTIVE: This article presents the link between breast cancer patients and family caregiver pretreatment psychosocial distress (anxiety, depression, marital satisfaction, and family quality) on patient pain interference during 1 year of breast cancer treatment. Findings suggest that caregiver anxiety and marital satisfaction may be important targets for future dyadic behavioral pain interventions.

Opioid Prescription Denials by Community Pharmacies for Cancer-Related Pain: A Case Series.

Pain is one of the most common symptoms experienced by patients living with cancer. Guidelines recommend opioids as the mainstay in the management of cancer-related pain. However, the opioid epidemic has resulted in policymakers recommending limitations on opioid prescribing which led to community pharmacies implementing various parameters. These restrictions have created barriers for patients with cancer-related pain attempting to fill opioid prescriptions from their community pharmacies. Additionally, in the setting of the opioid epidemic, there have been reports of systemic bias within community pharmacies, leading to experiences with embarrassment and shame for patients with cancer-related pain. This case series presents specific examples of community pharmacies declining to fill opioid prescriptions for patients with cancer-related pain and associated patient suffering.

Comprehensive Targeted Treatment for Neuropathic and Nociceptive Pain in Palliative Care Patients.

BACKGROUND: Pain is a common symptom in patients with advanced, metastatic, or terminal cancer. Neuropathic pain and psycho-emotional suffering are factors that increase the difficulty of pain management. Pain control in patients with cancer remains a challenge for medical professionals. STUDY QUESTION: What is the evolution of neuropathic/mixed pain compared with nociceptive pain under standardized treatment in patients with cancer? STUDY DESIGN: A prospective, longitudinal, open-label, nonrandomized study was conducted on patients with cancer pain. MEASURES AND OUTCOMES: Pain type was assessed at admission using the modified Brief Pain Inventory, and pain intensity was assessed daily using the Numerical Rating Scale for 14 days and on days 21 and 28. Screening of depression was performed on days 1, 7, 14, 21, and 28 using the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale. Patients with pain and depression received analgesics with antidepressants, while patients without depression received analgesics or analgesics with an anticonvulsant depending on the pain subtype. RESULTS: Of 72 patients, 23 had nociceptive pain and 49 had neuropathic/mixed pain. At admission, pain intensity was higher for patients with neuropathic/mixed pain compared with nociceptive pain (mean values: 7.06 vs. 5.82) with statistical significance ( P = 0.001) and remained as such at the end of this study (mean values: 3.77 vs. 2.73). A decrease in the mean pain intensity was observed in all types of pain, but without statistical significance regardless of pain type and treatment protocol used ( P = 0.77). If depression was present, antidepressants combined with analgesics decreased pain and depression scores significantly ( P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with neuropathic/mixed pain have higher levels of pain and lower response to treatment. Identifying psycho-emotional suffering can improve pain control by intervening in the physical and psycho-emotional components of pain.

Preferences of adults with cancer for systemic cancer treatment: do preferences differ based on age?

Background: We used the Therapy Preference Scale, a 30-item questionnaire, to determine cancer treatment preferences of adults with cancer. Methods: We used Wilcoxon's rank sum test and Fisher's exact test to compare the preferences of younger (<60 years) versus older adults (≥60 years). Results: While 56% of patients would accept treatment offering increased life expectancy at an expense of short-term side effects, 75% preferred maintenance of cognition, functional ability and quality of life to quantity of days. Oral instead of intravenous treatment (p = 0.003), shorter hospital stay (p = 0.03), preservation of cognitive function (p = 0.01) and avoidance of pain (p = 0.02) were more important to older patients compared with younger patients. Conclusion: Many patients prioritized maintenance of cognition, functional ability and quality of life; older patients valued oral treatment, shorter hospital stay, preservation of cognitive function and avoidance of pain.

Lay abstract Understanding the preferences of adults with cancer is important for physicians to develop personalized cancer treatment plans. We used a self-reported 30-item questionnaire, the Therapy Preference Scale, to help patients express their preferences with regard to safety, efficacy and other aspects of therapy. While 56% of the patients in our study would accept treatment offering increased life expectancy at an expense of short-term side effects, 75% preferred maintenance of cognition, functional ability and quality of life to quantity of days. Compared with younger patients, older patients preferred oral instead of intravenous treatment, shorter hospital stay, preservation of cognitive function and avoidance of pain.

Patient-reported pain severity and health-related quality of life in patients with multiple myeloma in real world clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: The association between patient self-reported pain severity and health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) is poorly understood. AIMS: This real-world study of symptomatic multiple myeloma (MM) patients sought to determine how pain severity from a single question asked during routine clinical consultation was associated with HRQoL. METHODS AND RESULTS: Point-in-time data on HRQoL of 330 patients with MM (median age 70 years) receiving anti-myeloma therapy in Germany and Italy from November 2017 through February 2018 were analyzed. HRQoL was assessed using validated questionnaires (Work Productivity and Activity Impairment [WPAI], European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire -C30 and -MY20). Physical pain severity was assessed during clinical consultation by a single question, asking patients to describe their pain as "no pain," "mild," "moderate," or "severe." Associations between patient-reported pain severity and HRQoL scores were assessed by analysis of variance or χ2 tests. Ninety-six of the 330 patients (29.1%) reported moderate to severe pain. Increase in pain severity, from "no" to "severe" pain, was associated with significantly decreased overall HRQoL (mean score 70.2 to 33.3); significant decreases in levels of physical (82.7 to 35.1), social (81.1 to 44.4), emotional (78.1 to 48.3), and role functioning (79.5 to 38.9); and increased levels of WPAI usual activity impairment (35.4 to 71.4), and fatigue burden (26.0 to 68.9) (all p < .001). CONCLUSION: Higher pain severity, based on a single self-report question, was associated with poorer HRQoL in patients with MM, thereby supporting the clinical relevance of directly asking patients to self-evaluate their pain severity.

Application of Quality Control Circle Activity in Improving Effectiveness of Drug Intervention in Lung Cancer Patients with Moderate to Severe Pain.

OBJECTIVE: Lung cancer has the highest incidence and mortality of all malignant tumors in China. Cancer pain dramatically affects patients' comfort level, causing insomnia, anorexia, anxiety, fear, depression, and a decline in the quality of life (QOL). The literature suggests a shortage of adequate cancer pain management for 59.1% of patients in China. The quality control circle (QCC) activity reflects the people-oriented core idea of management. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of QCC in enhancing the effectiveness of drug interventions in lung cancer patients with moderate to severe pain. METHODS: From January 2019 to July 2019, lung cancer patients with moderate to severe pain were treated with drugs. The total number of drug interventions was 3072. A QCC activity was performed following the ten steps of the plan-docheck- act (PDCA) model. The reasons for the poor effectiveness of drug intervention in lung cancer patients with moderate to severe pain were analyzed. Countermeasures were designed to improve the effectiveness of drug intervention, including setting up a pain college, writing a medication education manual, and formulating operational rules for the administration of narcotic drugs. The effectiveness of drug intervention in lung cancer patients with moderate to severe pain and activity ability scores of QCC members were analyzed statistically before and after QCC activity. The effectiveness of drug intervention was investigated and compared before and after establishing the QCC. RESULTS: After establishing the PDCA model, the effectiveness of drug intervention for moderate to severe pain in lung cancer patients increased from 56.28% to 85.29%. Members had significant improvement in problem-solving ability, responsibility, communication, coordination, self-confidence, team cohesion, enthusiasm, QCC skills, and harmony. CONCLUSION: QCC activity can significantly improve the efficiency of drug intervention in lung cancer patients with moderate to severe pain and their quality of life.