Alleviating severity of limb trauma pain with coadministration of topical sesame oil and standard treatments: A GRADE-assessed systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Recent randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have investigated the analgesic activity of sesame oil among patients with limb trauma; nevertheless, their findings are inconsistent. Hence, this review aimed to clarify the impact of topical administration of sesame oil on acute pain of adult outpatients with minor limb trauma. The online databases (e.g., Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science) were searched up to 31 January 2024. The RCTs were included if they compared the effect of applying standard treatments plus topical sesame oil to administering standard treatments alone or with a placebo/sham treatment. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) and the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool were applied to address the evidence quality and the study's methodological rigour, respectively. Four RCTs had the inclusion criteria, and their findings were pooled in a meta-analysis employing a random-effects approach. According to the pooled analysis, the reduction in mean change of the pain score from baseline to the second/third intervention day was significantly higher in favour of clients who received standard care plus daily massage of the trauma site with sesame oil compared to those who received a control condition (weighted mean difference: -1.10; 95% confidence interval [-1.62, -0.57]; p < 0.001). However, the evidence quality was moderate, and only two studies had good methodological rigour. Hence, more high-quality studies are needed to make a solid evidence-based conclusion about the favourable consequence of topical sesame oil on alleviating acute traumatic limb pain.

Implementation of a Web-Based Outpatient Asynchronous Consultation Service: Mixed Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: Asynchronous outpatient patient-to-provider communication is expanding in UK health care, requiring evaluation. During the pandemic, Aberdeen Royal Infirmary in Scotland expanded its outpatient asynchronous consultation service from dermatology (deployed in May 2020) to gastroenterology and pain management clinics. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a mixed methods study using staff, patient, and public perspectives and National Health Service (NHS) numerical data to obtain a rounded picture of innovation as it happened. METHODS: Focus groups (3 web-based and 1 face-to-face; n=22) assessed public readiness for this service, and 14 interviews with staff focused on service design and delivery. The service's effects were examined using NHS Grampian service use data, a patient satisfaction survey (n=66), and 6 follow-up patient interviews. Survey responses were descriptively analyzed. Demographics, acceptability, nonattendance rates, and appointment outcomes of users were compared across levels of area deprivation in which they live and medical specialties. Interviews and focus groups underwent theory-informed thematic analysis. RESULTS: Staff anticipated a simple technical system transfer from dermatology to other receptive medical specialties, but despite a favorable setting and organizational assistance, it was complicated. Key implementation difficulties included pandemic-induced technical integration delays, misalignment with existing administrative processes, and discontinuity in project management. The pain management clinic began asynchronous consultations (digital appointments) in December 2021, followed by the gastroenterology clinic in February 2022. Staff quickly learned how to explain and use this service. It was thought to function better for pain management as it fitted preexisting practices. From May to September 2022, the dermatology (adult and pediatric), gastroenterology, and pain management clinics offered 1709 appointments to a range of patients (n=1417). Digital appointments reduced travel by an estimated 44,712 miles (~71,956.81 km) compared to the face-to-face mode. The deprivation profile of people who chose to use this service closely mirrored that of NHS Grampian's population overall. There was no evidence that deprivation impacted whether digital appointment users subsequently received treatment. Only 18% (12/66) of survey respondents were unhappy or very unhappy with being offered a digital appointment. The benefits mentioned included better access, convenience, decreased travel and waiting time, information sharing, and clinical flexibility. Overall, patients, the public, and staff recognized its potential as an NHS service but highlighted informed choice and flexibility. Better communication-including the use of the term assessment instead of appointment-may increase patient acceptance. CONCLUSIONS: Asynchronous pain management and gastroenterology consultations are viable and acceptable. Implementing this service is easiest when existing administrative processes face minimal disruption, although continuous support is needed. This study can inform practical strategies for supporting staff in adopting asynchronous consultations (eg, preparing for nonlinearity and addressing task issues). Patients need clear explanations and access to technical support, along with varied consultation options, to ensure digital inclusion.

Improving door-to-analgesia timing in musculoskeletal injuries in an academic emergency department in India: a quality improvement project.

INTRODUCTION: Pain, more frequently due to musculoskeletal injuries, is a prevalent concern in emergency departments (EDs). Timely analgesic administration is paramount in the acute setting of ED. Despite its importance, many EDs face challenges in pain management and present opportunities for improvement. This initiative aimed to expedite the administration of the first analgesic in patients with musculoskeletal pain in the ED. LOCAL PROBLEM: Observations within our ED revealed that patients with musculoskeletal injuries triaged to yellow or green areas experienced prolonged waiting times, leading to delayed analgesic administration, thereby adversely affecting clinical care and patient satisfaction. SPECIFIC AIM: The aim of our quality improvement (QI) project was to reduce the time to administration of first analgesia by 30% from baseline, in patients with musculoskeletal injuries presenting to our academic ED, in a period of 8 weeks after the baseline phase. METHODS: A multidisciplinary QI team systematically applied Point-of-Care Quality Improvement and Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycle methodologies. Process mapping and fishbone analyses identified the challenges in analgesia administration. Targeted interventions were iteratively refined through PDSA cycles. INTERVENTIONS: Interventions such as pain score documentation at triage, fast-tracking of patients with moderate-to-severe pain, resident awareness sessions, a pain management protocol and prescription audits were executed during the PDSA cycles. Successful elements were reinforced and adjustments were made to address the identified challenges. RESULTS: The median door-to-analgesia timing during the baseline phase was 55.5 min (IQR, 25.75-108 min). During the postintervention phase, the median was significantly reduced to 15 min (IQR, 5-37 min), exceeding the anticipated outcomes and indicating a substantial 73% reduction (p value <0.001) from baseline. CONCLUSION: Implementing simple change ideas resulted in a substantial improvement in door-to-analgesia timing within the ED. These findings significantly contribute to ongoing discussions on the optimisation of pain management in emergency care.

The Effects of WeChat-Based Teach-Back Health Education on Patients With Advanced Cancer Pain.

BACKGROUND: Providing effective health education is essential for patients with cancer-related pain. One solution is leveraging instant messaging tools for teach-back health education. OBJECTIVES: This study investigated the effects of WeChat-based teach-back health education on patients with advanced cancer who underwent patient-controlled intrathecal analgesia implantation and used hydromorphone. METHODS: This retrospective study evaluated 150 hospitalized patients with advanced cancer pain. Patients were classified into a conventional health education group (N = 50) and a teach-back group (N = 100) based on whether they received WeChat-based teach-back health education. Pain was rated using a numeric rating scale, and sleep quality was measured using the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index at one, two, and three months postdischarge. FINDINGS: Patients who received remote teach-back health education better managed their pain. Data also demonstrated improvements in patients' sleep quality and caregiver satisfaction, and reductions in the occurrence of adverse reactions.

Sympathetic nerve blocks for persistent pain in adults with inoperable abdominopelvic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Persistent visceral pain is an unpleasant sensation coming from one or more organs within the body. Visceral pain is a common symptom in those with advanced cancer. Interventional procedures, such as neurolytic sympathetic nerve blocks, have been suggested as additional treatments that may play a part in optimising pain management for individuals with this condition. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of neurolytic sympathetic nerve blocks for persistent visceral pain in adults with inoperable abdominopelvic cancer compared to standard care or placebo and comparing single blocks to combination blocks. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases without language restrictions on 19 October 2022 and ran a top-up search on 31 October 2023: CENTRAL; MEDLINE via Ovid; Embase via Ovid; LILACS. We searched trial registers without language restrictions on 2 November 2022: ClinicalTrials.gov; WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). We searched grey literature, checked reference lists of reviews and retrieved articles for additional studies, and performed citation searches on key articles. We also contacted experts in the field for unpublished and ongoing trials. Our trial protocol was preregistered in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews on 21 October 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA: We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any sympathetic nerve block targeting sites commonly used to treat abdominal pelvic pain from inoperable malignancies in adults to standard care or placebo. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We independently selected trials based on predefined inclusion criteria, resolving any differences via adjudication with a third review author. We used a random-effects model as some heterogeneity was expected between the studies due to differences in the interventions being assessed and malignancy types included in the study population. We chose three primary outcomes and four secondary outcomes of interest. We sought consumer input to refine our review outcomes and assessed extracted data using Cochrane's risk of bias 2 tool (RoB 2). We assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE system. MAIN RESULTS: We included 17 studies with 1025 participants in this review. Fifteen studies with a total of 951 participants contributed to the quantitative analysis. Single block versus standard care Primary outcomes No included studies reported our primary outcome, 'Proportion of participants reporting no worse than mild pain after treatment at 14 days'. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of sympathetic nerve blocks on reducing pain to no worse than mild pain at 14 days when compared to standard care due to insufficient data (very low-certainty evidence). Sympathetic nerve blocks may provide small to 'little to no' improvement in quality of life (QOL) scores at 14 days after treatment when compared to standard care, but the evidence is very uncertain (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.70 to 0.25; I² = 87%; 4 studies, 150 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the risk of serious adverse events as defined in our review as only one study contributed data to this outcome. Sympathetic nerve blocks may have an 'increased risk' to 'no additional risk' of harm compared with standard care (very low-certainty evidence). Secondary outcomes Sympathetic nerve blocks showed a small to 'little to no' effect on participant-reported pain scores at 14 days using a 0 to 10 visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain compared with standard care, but the evidence is very uncertain (mean difference (MD) -0.44, 95% CI -0.98 to 0.11; I² = 56%; 5 studies, 214 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There may be a 'moderate to large' to 'little to no' reduction in daily consumption of opioids postprocedure at 14 days with sympathetic nerve blocks compared with standard care, but the evidence is very uncertain (change in daily consumption of opioids at 14 days as oral milligrams morphine equivalent (MME): MD -41.63 mg, 95% CI -78.54 mg to -4.72 mg; I² = 90%; 4 studies, 130 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of sympathetic nerve blocks on participant satisfaction with procedure at 0 to 7 days and time to need for retreatment or treatment effect failure (or both) due to insufficient data. Combination block versus single block Primary outcomes There is no evidence about the effect of combination sympathetic nerve blocks compared with single sympathetic nerve blocks on the proportion of participants reporting no worse than mild pain after treatment at 14 days because no studies reported this outcome. There may be a small to 'little to no' effect on QOL score at 14 days after treatment, but the evidence is very uncertain (very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the risk of serious adverse events with combination sympathetic nerve blocks compared with single sympathetic nerve blocks due to limited reporting in the included studies (very low-certainty evidence). Secondary outcomes The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of combination sympathetic nerve blocks compared with single sympathetic nerve blocks on participant-reported pain score and change in daily consumption of opioids postprocedure, at 14 days. There may be a small to 'little to no' effect, but the evidence is very uncertain (very low-certainty evidence). There is no evidence about the effect on participant satisfaction with procedure at 0 to 7 days and time to need for retreatment or treatment effect failure (or both) due to these outcomes not being measured by the studies. Risk of bias The risk of bias was predominately high for most outcomes in most studies due to significant concerns regarding adequate blinding. Very few studies were deemed as low risk across all domains for any outcome. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is limited evidence to support or refute the use of sympathetic nerve blocks for persistent abdominopelvic pain due to inoperable malignancy. We are very uncertain about the effect of combination sympathetic nerve blocks compared with single sympathetic nerve blocks. The certainty of the evidence is very low and these findings should be interpreted with caution.

Quality Improvement in an Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Unit Through Pain Assessment and Control.

The aim of the study is to determine whether the assessment of postoperative pain and timely measures to control it improve the quality of medical care in intensive care units (ICUs). To develop an improvement model with a focus on pain assessment and control. 151 patients were included in the study, divided into two groups: a retrospective group (RG)-60 patients and a prospective group (PG)-91 patients. A multimodal approach to pain control was applied to all patients. We administered the Critical Care Pain Observational Tool (CPOT) to PG upon admission to the ICU. Visual analog scale (VAS) for pain assessment was used in all non intubated patients in 6 hours intervals. In the PG, а model for improvement was applied using a PDSA (Plan, Do, Study/ Check, Act) cycle. The following indicators have been used: process, outcome, and balancing indicators. A survey of the PG was also conducted. The developed Model of improvement increased the VAS score reporting success rate from 40 to 95%, which allowed significantly better pain control. In PG the registered CPOT score was 1.71 ± 0.73. 90% of patients in PG have an average VAS score below 5 after the improvement model, while in RG-50% of patients, which is statistically significant (P < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in balancing indicators between the two groups. Conclusion: The conducted survey confirmed the positive effect of the model. Quality improvement in the ICU depends on accurate assessment of postoperative pain and timely and adequate treatment.

The Medipol Combination: Novel Rectointercostal Fascial Plane Block and Pectointercostal Fascial Plane Block for Postoperative Analgesia Management After Cardiac Surgery: A Report of 15 Cases.

The parasternal blocks cannot cover the T7 and lower anterior and lateral branches of the thoracoabdominal nerves. In the open heart surgeries, chest drainage tubes are generally outside the target of the parasternal blocks. Recently, Tulgar et al described a novel interfascial plane block technique named "recto-intercostal fascial plane block" (RIFPB). RIFPB is performed between the rectus abdominis muscle and the sixth to seventh costal cartilages. RIFPB targets the anterior and lateral cutaneous branches of the T6-T9 thoracoabdominal nerves. In this clinical report, we want to share our experiences about pectointercostal plane block and RIFPB combination (Medipol Combination) after cardiac surgery.

Spinal cord stimulation has a place in the treatment of chronic pain conditions. / Ryggmargsstimulering har en plass i behandling av langvarige smertetilstander.

Spinal cord stimulation is an important modality of treatment for some patients with chronic pain. Patient satisfaction following this treatment is comparable to outcomes from spine surgery in Norway.

The effects of a prehabilitation programme based on therapeutic exercise, back care education, and pain neuroscience education in patients scheduled for lumbar radiculopathy surgery: A study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

The aim of this present clinical trial is to evaluate the effectiveness of a multicomponent prehabilitation programme administered through educational videos versus another programme based on written exercise recommendations, in patients scheduled for lumbar radiculopathy surgery. This study will be a multicentre, controlled, randomised, parallel clinical trial. One hundred participants undergoing lumbar radiculopathy surgery who meet the established inclusion criteria will be recruited at different Spanish hospitals. The experimental group will follow a 4-week prehabilitation programme combining therapeutic exercise, back care education, and pain neuroscience education delivered through videos designed for consumption at home. The control group will be provided with written instructions to perform therapeutic exercises during the same prehabilitation time period. The primary outcome of the study will be disability, assessed using the Spanish version of the Oswestry Disability Index. The secondary outcomes will be pain perception, health-related quality of life, fear avoidance, kinesiophobia, catastrophising, anxiety, depression, physical activity, and the treatment satisfaction of the patients. This study will provide evidence for the effectiveness of a home-based multicomponent prehabilitation programme that addresses some already identified barriers to patient attendance in face-to-face programmes. Understanding the medium and long-term effects of pre-surgery lumbar muscle training and pain neuroscience education administered via instructional videos watched by patients at home, will help improve the design of prehabilitation programmes in this population while also improving the cost-effectiveness of such interventions.

Feasibility of Web-Based Single-Session Empowered Relief in Patients With Chronic Pain Taking Methadone or Buprenorphine: Protocol for a Single-Arm Trial.

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain affects tens of millions of US adults and continues to rise in prevalence. Nonpharmacologic behavioral pain treatments are greatly needed and yet are often inaccessible, particularly in settings where medication prescribing is prioritized. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to test the feasibility of a live-instructor, web-based 1-session pain relief skills class in an underserved and potentially at-risk population: people with chronic pain prescribed methadone or buprenorphine either solely for pain or for comorbid opioid use disorder (OUD). METHODS: This is a national, prospective, single-arm, uncontrolled feasibility trial. The trial is untethered from medical care; to enhance participants' willingness to join the study, no medical records or drug-monitoring records are accessed. At least 45 participants will be recruited from outpatient pain clinics and from an existing research database of individuals who have chronic pain and are taking methadone or buprenorphine. Patient-reported measures will be collected at 6 time points (baseline, immediately post treatment, 2 weeks, and months 1-3) via a web-based platform, paper, or phone formats to include individuals with limited internet or computer access and low literacy skills. At baseline, participants complete demographic questions and 13 study measures (Treatment Expectations, Body Pain Map, Medication Use, Pain Catastrophizing Scale [PCS], Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System [PROMIS] Measures, and Opioid Craving Scale). Immediately post treatment, a treatment satisfaction and acceptability measure is administered on a 0 (very dissatisfied) to 10 (completely satisfied) scale, with 3 of these items being the primary outcome (perceived usefulness, participant satisfaction, and likelihood of using the skills). At each remaining time point, the participants complete all study measures minus treatment expectations and satisfaction. Participants who do not have current OUD will be assessed for historical OUD, with presence of OUD (yes or no), and history of OUD (yes or no) reported separately. Feasibility threshold is set as an overall group treatment satisfaction rating of 8 of 10. In-depth qualitative interviews will be conducted with about 10 participants to obtain additional data on patient perceptions, satisfactions, needs, and wants. To assess preliminary efficacy, we will examine changes in pain catastrophizing, pain intensity, pain bothersomeness, sleep disturbance, pain interference, depression, anxiety, physical function, global impression of change, and opioid craving at 1 month post treatment. RESULTS: This project opened to enrollment in September 2021 and completed the recruitment in October 2023. The data collection was completed in February 2024. Results are expected to be published in late 2024. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this trial will inform the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of Empowered Relief in this population and will inform the design of a future randomized controlled trial testing web-based Empowered Relief in chronic pain and comorbid OUD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05057988; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05057988. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/53784.

Incorporating Music Therapy With Acupuncture in Managing Cancer Pain at an Acupuncture Practice.

BACKGROUND: Complementary and alternative medicine encompasses various nonpharmacologic interventions for managing pain, such as acupuncture and music therapy. Few studies have combined these two interventions in the management of cancer-related pain. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this evidence-based project was to compare acupuncture-only therapy versus dual therapy (acupuncture and music therapy) on pain intensity scores in patients with cancer. METHODS: This evidence-based project included 102 participants at a private acupuncture practice. One group had acupuncture only for six weeks, and another had six weeks of acupuncture and music therapy. The Numeric Pain Rating Scale was used to assess pain before and after the interventions. FINDINGS: Findings showed that both groups had clinically and statistically significant improvements in pain intensity scores. Although a significant difference was not noted between the two groups, acupuncture and music therapy were each found to be effective for managing cancer-related pain.

Collaborative Care for Chronic Pain After Traumatic Brain Injury: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Chronic pain after traumatic brain injury (TBI) is prevalent and associated with poor outcomes. By providing multidisciplinary care through expert consultation, a collaborative care (CC) treatment approach may reduce pain interference. Objective: To compare CC with usual care (UC) in decreasing pain interference. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial was conducted from July 2018 through April 2021 at 2 hospital-based academic rehabilitation medicine clinics in Seattle, Washington. Participants included adults with mild-to-severe TBI (at least 6 months before enrollment) and chronic pain. Data analysis was performed from March 30, 2022, to August 30, 2023. Intervention: The CC intervention (called TBI Care) included up to 12 in-person or telephone visits over 16 weeks with a care manager (CM) who provided person-centered cognitive behavioral treatment. The CM met weekly with members of the expert team to review participants and discuss recommendations to optimize treatment. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was pain interference on the Brief Pain Inventory at treatment conclusion (4 months after randomization). Secondary outcomes included pain interference at 8 months; pain severity; symptoms of depression, anxiety, and sleep disturbance; pain-related emergency department visits; community participation; and participant satisfaction. Linear mixed-effects regression was used for analysis. Results: A total of 1379 individuals were screened for eligibility, and 158 were randomized (79 to CC and 79 to UC). The participants were mostly women (92 participants [58%]) with a mean (SD) age of 46.8 (13.2) years and a mean (SD) of 15.3 (3.0) years of education. TBI occurred a mean (SD) of 4.0 (5.9) years (median [IQR], 1.9 [0.8-4.5] years) before enrollment. All TBI severities were included, and of 149 participants for whom TBI severity was known, the majority (97 participants [65%]) had mild TBI. In the CC group, 71 participants (90%) completed at least 11 sessions, and, at 4 months, this group had significantly lower pain interference scores compared with the UC group (mean [SD], 3.46 [2.17] vs 5.03 [2.28]). This difference was maintained at 8 months after randomization, with mean (SD) TBI care pain interference scores of 3.61 (2.22) for CC vs 4.68 (2.51) for UC. At 4 months, there was significantly lower pain severity in the CC group vs UC group (mean [SD] score, 3.63 [1.95] vs 4.90 [1.96]), as well as symptoms of depression (mean [SD] score, 8.07 [5.34] vs 11.31 [6.37]) and anxiety (mean [SD], 6.20 [5.17] vs 9.58 [6.00]). Satisfaction with pain treatment (mean [SD] score, 2.99 [1.23] vs 2.52 [1.25]), clinical care (mean [SD] score, 3.28 [1.00] vs 2.84 [1.26]), and overall health care (mean [SD] score, 3.25 [0.88] vs 2.82 [1.00]) were significantly higher in the CC group vs the UC group; global impression of change was significantly lower in the CC group vs the UC group (mean [SD] score, 2.74 [1.02] vs 3.47 [1.26]) (lower scores denote a better impression of change). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial of CC compared with UC for patients with TBI, CC was effective at reducing pain interference and was sustained at 8-month follow-up. Further research is needed to examine the implementation and cost-effectiveness of CC for TBI in other health care settings. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03523923.

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.

Continuous Superficial Parasternal Intercostal Plane Catheters for Poststernotomy Pain Control: A Case Series.

This case series describes the safety and effectiveness of superficial parasternal intercostal plane catheters for poststernotomy pain control in 4 patients who underwent multivessel coronary artery bypass grafting. Patients had reduced sternal pain and opioid consumption while the catheters ran continuously for 72 hours without complications. Our experience suggests the effectiveness of parasternal blocks can be safely prolonged with catheters, and they can be a useful addition to pain management strategies for this patient population.

Ultrasound-Guided Sacral Erector Spinae Plane Block: A Feasible Option for Pain Management During Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Case Report.

Inability to remain motionless owing to pain during magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) may increase the need for sedation and analgesia. Here, we present a case where ultrasound-guided sacral erector spinae plane block (ESPB) was used successfully for pain management during an MRI in a patient suffering from severe sacral pain. Sacral ESPB was performed with a total of 30 mL of 0.25% bupivacaine at the level of the intermediate sacral crest. The patient achieved sensory block in the L5-S4 dermatomes without motor block, resulting in complete pain relief. This case report highlights the feasibility of ultrasound-guided sacral ESPB as a potential pain management technique.

Cryoneurolysis versus radiofrequency ablation outcome on pain experience in chronic low back pain (COPE): a single-blinded randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: A comparison of cryoneurolysis or radio frequency (RF) with placebo in patients with facetogenic chronic low back pain (LBP) for patient global impression of change (PGIC), pain intensity, function and quality of life, with 1-year follow-up. DESIGN: Single-centre, single-blinded placebo-controlled randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Single-centre study. PARTICIPANTS: Inclusion from March 2020 to September 2022: consenting adults over 18 years of age, LBP>3 months, average Numeric Rating Scale LBP≥4 average last 14 days and a positive response to a diagnostic medial branch block (>50% pain reduction after 60 min). INTERVENTIONS: 120 patients were block randomised 1:1:1 to cryoneurolysis, RF or placebo of the medial branch nerves. Physical therapy was added after 4 weeks for all groups. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was PGIC 4 weeks after the intervention. Secondary outcomes included pain intensity (Numeric Rating Scale, NRS), quality of life (Short Form 36, EQ-5D-5L), disability (Oswestry Disability Index), depression (Major Depression Inventory) and catastrophising (Pain Catastrophising Scale). Outcomes were measured at 4 weeks, 3, 6 and 12 months. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference in PGIC at 4 weeks between cryoneurolysis and placebo (risk ratio (RR) 2; 95% CI 0.75 to 5.33, p=0.17) and RF and placebo (RR 1.6; 95% CI 0.57 to 4.49, p=0.37), except PGIC for cryoneurolysis at 6-month follow-up (RR 5.1; 95% CI 1.20 to 22.03, p=0.03). No statistically significant differences were found in secondary follow-up endpoints. CONCLUSIONS: Denervation of the medial branch nerve by either cryoneurolysis or RF compared with placebo did not demonstrate significant improvement in PGIC, pain intensity, function and quality of life in patients with facetogenic chronic LBP at short-term or long-term follow-up. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04786145.