RESUMO
BACKGROUND: This article summarizes the results of the German guideline on radiofrequency denervation of the facet joints and the sacroiliac joint. Evidence on the indications, test blocks and technical parameters are presented. OBJECTIVE: The aim is to avoid overtreatment and undertreatment, which is also of socioeconomic importance. MATERIAL AND METHOD: A systematic evaluation of the literature was carried out according to the grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE) approach. A multidisciplinary guideline group has developed recommendations and statements. RESULTS: Statements and recommendations were given for 20 key questions. There was an 87.5% consensus for 1 recommendation and 100% consensus for all other recommendations and statements. The guideline was approved by all scientific medical societies involved. Specific questions included the value of the medical history, examination and imaging, the need for conservative treatment prior to an intervention, the importance of test blocks (medial branch block and lateral branch block), choice of imaging for denervation, choice of trajectory, the possibility to influence the size of the lesion, stimulation, the possibility of revision, sedation and decision support for patients with anticoagulants, metal implants and pacemakers and advice on how to avoid complications. CONCLUSION: Selected patients can benefit from well-performed radiofrequency denervation. The guideline recommendations are based on very low to moderate quality of evidence.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The second scheduled update of the German S3 guidelines on long-term opioid therapy for chronic noncancer pain (CNCP), the LONTS (AWMF registration number 145/003), was started in December 2018. METHODS: The guidelines were developed by 28 scientific societies and 2 patient self-help organizations under the coordination of the German Pain Society. A systematic literature search in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and Scopus databases (up until December 2018) was performed. The systematic reviews with meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials with opioids for CNCP from the previous versions of the guideline were updated. Levels of evidence were assigned according to the classification system of the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. The strength of the recommendations was established by formal multistep procedures in order to reach a consensus according to the Association of the Medical Scientific Societies in Germany (AWMF) regulations. The guidelines were reviewed by four external pain physicians. Public comments were possible for 4 weeks. RESULTS: Opioid-based analgesics are a drug-based treatment option for short-term (4-12 weeks), intermediate-term (13-25 weeks) and long-term (≥26 weeks) therapy of chronic osteoarthritis, diabetic polyneuropathy, postherpetic neuralgia and low back pain. Contraindications are primary headaches as well as functional somatic syndromes and mental disorders with the (cardinal) symptom pain. Based on a clinical consensus the guidelines list other medical conditions for which a therapy with opioids can be considered on an individual basis. Long-term therapy of CNCP with opioids is associated with relevant risks. CONCLUSION: A responsible administration of opioids requires consideration of possible indications and contraindications as well as regular assessment of efficacy and adverse effects. Opioids remain a treatment option for CNCP if nonpharmacological therapies are not effective and/or other drugs are not effective, are not tolerated or are contraindicated.
Assuntos
Analgésicos Opioides , Dor Crônica , Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapêutico , Dor Crônica/tratamento farmacológico , Medicina Baseada em Evidências , Alemanha , Humanos , Sociedades MédicasRESUMO
STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review of the literature and subsequent meta-analysis for the development of a new guideline. OBJECTIVES: This manuscript summarizes the recommendations from a new clinical guideline published by the German Spine Society. It covers the current evidence on recommendations regarding the indication, test blocks and use of radiofrequency denervation. The guidelines aim is to improve patient care and efficiency of the procedure. METHODS: A multidisciplinary working group formulated recommendations based on the Grades of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach and the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument. RESULTS: 20 clinical questions were defined for guideline development, with 87.5% consensus achieved by committee members for one recommendation and 100% consensus for all other topics. Specific questions that were addressed included clinical history, examination and imaging, conservative treatment before injections, diagnostic blocks, the injected medications, the cut-off value in pain-reduction for a diagnostic block as well as the number of blocks, image guidance, the cannula trajectories, the lesion size, stimulation, repeat radiofrequency denervation, sedation, cessation or continuation of anticoagulants, the influence of metal hardware, and ways to mitigate complications. CONCLUSION: Radiofrequency (RF) denervation of the spine and the SI joint may provide benefit to well-selected individuals. The recommendations of this guideline are based on very low to moderate quality of evidence as well as professional consensus. The guideline working groups recommend that research efforts in relation to all aspects of management of facet joint pain and SI joint pain should be intensified.
RESUMO
Chronic low back disorders are the leading cause of direct and indirect healthcare burden globally. Exercise training improves pain intensity, mental health and physical function. However, the optimal prescription variables are unknown. We aim to compare the efficacy of various exercise dosages for chronic low back disorders to identify the optimal prescription variables. Six databases (Medline, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL, PsycINFO, EMBASE and CENTRAL), trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform) and reference lists of prior systematic reviews will be searched, and we will conduct forward and backward citation tracking. We will include peer-reviewed randomised controlled trials (individual, cluster or cross-over trials) published in English or German language comparing exercise training to other exercise training or non-exercise training interventions (conservative, non-surgical, non-pharmacological, non-invasive treatments, placebo, sham, usual/standard care, no-treatment control, waitlist control) in adults with chronic low back disorders. Outcomes will include pain intensity, disability, mental health, adverse events, adherence rate, dropout rate and work capacity. Version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool will be employed. The dose will be categorised as cumulative dose (total and weekly minutes of exercise training) and individual dose prescription variables (intervention duration, session duration, frequency and intensity). Dose-response model-based network meta-analysis will be used to assess the comparative efficacy of different exercise doses to determine a dose-response relationship. The certainty of evidence will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. Information about optimal exercise training dosage will help in enhancing treatment outcomes.
RESUMO
Using a structured approach and expert consensus, we developed an evidence-based guideline on the diagnosis of back pain and the treatment of non-specific back pain in children and adolescents. The first part comprises etiology, risk factors, and diagnosis. The second part, published in the same issue, includes treatment and prevention. A comprehensive and systematic literature search was conducted to identify relevant guidelines and studies. Based on the findings of this literature search, recommendations on risk factors and diagnosis were formulated and voted on by experts in a structured consensus-building process. Notable red flags for specific back pain and evidence-based risk factors for non-specific back pain in children and adolescents were identified. Only three evidence-based recommendations could be formulated for causes, red flags, and risk factors for back pain, while two recommendations are based on expert consensus. Regarding diagnostics, eight expert consensus recommendations and one evidence-based recommendation could be provided. Despite the importance of adequate diagnosis for the treatment of back pain in children and adolescents, results of this work confirm the deficit in research investment in this area.
RESUMO
Using a structured approach and expert consensus, we developed an evidence-based guideline on the treatment and prevention of non-specific back pain in children and adolescents. A comprehensive and systematic literature search identified relevant guidelines and studies. Based on the findings of this literature search, recommendations on treatment and prevention were formulated and voted on by experts in a structured consensus-building process. Physical therapy (particularly physical activity) and psychotherapy (particularly cognitive behavioral therapy) are recommended for treating pediatric non-specific back pain. Intensive interdisciplinary treatment programs should be provided for chronic and severe pain. Drug therapy should not be applied in children and adolescents. Further research on non-specific back pain in childhood and adolescence is strongly needed to reduce the imbalance between the high burden of non-specific back pain in childhood and adolescence and the low research activity in this field.
RESUMO
The opioid epidemic in North America challenges national guidelines worldwide to define the importance of opioids for the management of chronic noncancer pain (CNCP). METHODS: The second update of the German guidelines on long-term opioid therapy for CNCP was developed by 26 scientific associations and 2 patient self-help organizations. A systematic literature search in CENTRAL, Medline, and Scopus (to May 2019) was performed. Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials and open-label extension studies with opioids for CNCP were conducted. Levels of evidence were assigned according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine classification system. The formulation and strength of recommendations were established by multistep formalized procedures to reach a consensus according to German Association of the Medical Scientific Societies regulations. The guidelines underwent external review by 4 experts and public commentary. RESULTS: Opioids are one drug-based treatment option for short- (4-12 weeks), intermediate- (13-26 weeks), and long-term (>26 weeks) therapy of chronic pain in osteoarthritis, diabetic polyneuropathy, postherpetic neuralgia, and low back pain. Contraindications are primary headaches, functional somatic syndromes, and mental disorders with the (cardinal) symptom of pain. For specified other clinical pain conditions, short- and long-term therapy with opioids should be evaluated on an individual basis. Long-term therapy with opioids is associated with relevant risks. CONCLUSION: Responsible application of opioids requires consideration of possible indications and contraindications, as well as regular assessment of clinical response and adverse effects. Neither uncritical opioid prescription nor general rejection of opioids is justified in patients with CNCP.
RESUMO
Interdisciplinary multimodal pain therapy (IMPT) is a biopsychosocial treatment approach for patients with chronic pain that comprises at least psychological and physiotherapeutic interventions. Core outcome sets (COSs) are currently developed in different medical fields to standardize and improve the selection of outcome domains, and measurement instruments in clinical trials, to make trial results meaningful, to pool trial results, and to allow indirect comparison between interventions. The objective of this study was to develop a COS of patient-relevant outcome domains for chronic pain in IMPT clinical trials. An international, multiprofessional panel (patient representatives [n = 5], physicians specialized in pain medicine [n = 5], physiotherapists [n = 5], clinical psychologists [n = 5], and methodological researchers [n = 5]) was recruited for a 3-stage consensus study, which consisted of a mixed-method approach comprising an exploratory systematic review, a preparing online survey to identify important outcome domains, a face-to-face consensus meeting to agree on COS domains, and a second online survey (Delphi) establishing agreement on definitions for the domains included. The panel agreed on the following 8 domains to be included into the COS for IMPT: pain intensity, pain frequency, physical activity, emotional wellbeing, satisfaction with social roles and activities, productivity (paid and unpaid, at home and at work, inclusive presentism and absenteeism), health-related quality of life, and patient's perception of treatment goal achievement. The complexity of chronic pain in a biopsychosocial context is reflected in the current recommendation and includes physical, mental, and social outcomes. In a subsequent step, measurement instruments will be identified via systematic reviews.