Off-label pharmacological treatment for neuropathic pain: A Delphi study by the Spanish Pain Society Neuropathic Pain Task Force.

OBJECTIVES: The use of off-label pharmacotherapies for neuropathic pain (NP) is growing relating to the many unmet needs of patients. However, clinical guidelines fail to address it, and the available evidence is sparse and fragmented. We arranged a formal expert consensus to address this controversial issue and provide some guidance on judicious use. METHODS: A two-round standard Delphi survey that involved pain clinic specialists with experience in the research and management of NP was done over an ad hoc 40-item questionnaire prepared by the authors. Consensus on each statement was defined as at least either 80% endorsement or rejection after the second round. RESULTS: Forty-three and thirty-seven panelists participated in the first and second round, respectively. Consensus was reached in 34 out of 40 statements. Endorsed alternatives for unresponsive patients include non-gabapentinoid antiepileptics (oxcarbazepine and eslicarbazepine), venlafaxine, intravenous lidocaine (when doses can be optimized), and some vaporized cannabinoids (under appropriate surveillance). In addition, lacosamide, low-dose naltrexone, propofol, or ketamine could prove beneficial if subjected to more research. Other options were rejected, and there was controversy about the usefulness of topical preparations. DISCUSSION: For patients who do not respond to standard NP treatments, some other viable pharmacological options can be attempted before advancing to other therapeutic stages. This may help patients who are reluctant to or have some contraindication for interventional therapies.

Effect and safety of listening to music or audiobooks as a coadjuvant treatment for chronic pain patients under opioid treatment: a study protocol for an open-label, parallel-group, randomised, controlled, proof-of-concept clinical trial in a tertiary hospital in the Barcelona South Metropolitan area.

BACKGROUND: Chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) treatment's primary goal is to maintain physical and mental functioning while improving quality of life. Opioid use in CNCP patients has increased in recent years, and non-pharmacological interventions such as music listening have been proposed to counter it. Unlike other auditive stimuli, music can activate emotional-regulating and reward-regulating circuits, making it a potential tool to modulate attentional processes and regulate mood. This study's primary objective is to provide the first evidence on the distinct (separate) effects of music listening as a coadjuvant maintenance analgesic treatment in CNCP patients undergoing opioid analgesia. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This will be a single-centre, phase II, open-label, parallel-group, proof-of-concept randomised clinical trial with CNCP patients under a minimum 4-week regular opioid treatment. We plan to include 70 consecutive patients, which will be randomised (1:1) to either the experimental group (active music listening) or the control group (active audiobooks listening). During 28 days, both groups will listen daily (for at least 30 min and up to 1 hour) to preset playlists tailored to individual preferences.Pain intensity scores at each visit, the changes (differences) from baseline and the proportions of responders according to various definitions based on pain intensity differences will be described and compared between study arms. We will apply longitudinal data assessment methods (mixed generalised linear models) taking the patient as a cluster to assess and compare the endpoints' evolution. We will also use the mediation analysis framework to adjust for the effects of additional therapeutic measures and obtain estimates of effect with a causal interpretation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol has been reviewed, and ethics approval has been obtained from the Bellvitge University Hospital Institutional Review Board, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain. The results from this study will be actively disseminated through manuscript publications and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05726266.

Advances and Pitfalls of Specialized Pain Care through Public and Private Health Care Providers in Catalonia and the Balearic Islands: A Physician's Survey.

Optimal diagnosis and treatment of pain require a multidisciplinary approach that demands considerable coordination and forethought. A cross-sectional physician survey based on an online questionnaire was carried out to assess the adoption of multidisciplinary working patterns, compare the public and private models, and provide an update on the resources and organization of specialized pain care in Catalonia and the Balearic Islands. Active pain practitioners identified through the Catalan Health Service and Pain Society databases were sent an invitation in December 2020. Of the 321 physicians contacted, 91 (28.3%) answered and 71 provided complete responses (commonly anesthesiologists, representing 92 different sites; some worked at public and private sites). Up to 78.7% reported working in pain management teams, but only 53.5% were regularly involved in teaching or research activities. Thus, the proportion of multidisciplinary sites lies somewhere in-between. Median wait times were significantly shorter and within the recommended standards in private practices (e.g., 15 vs. 90 days in public practices for noncancer patients). In turn, private practices were slightly less staffed and equipped, albeit the differences did not reach statistical significance. Respondents made a median of 530 regular and 30 emergency visits per year, of which 190 involved interventional procedures. They offered a wide range of pharmacological and interventional therapies, although psychotherapy and the most sophisticated procedures were only available in ≤50% of sites. Pain clinicians and facilities are reasonably available in Catalonia, but barely more than half are truly multidisciplinary. Public and private practices differ in some aspects; the latter seems to be more accessible, but it is restricted to patients who can afford it. Compared to previous reports, this update shows both advances and outstanding issues. Multidisciplinary care could be expanded by incorporating more psychologists and some interventional procedures. The public practices should reduce wait times.