The utility of universal urinary drug screening in chronic pain management.

BACKGROUND: A recent systematic review found few studies that assessed the value of urinary drug screening (UDS) in the management of chronic pain. The Pain Management Unit in Halifax, Nova Scotia, has recently implemented tandem mass spectrometry (TMS) UDS for all new patients. AIMS: To study the prevalence of unexpected TMS UDS results at a hospital-based chronic pain center, to assess which drugs are most likely to contribute to an unexpected result and to assess the clinical utilization of unexpected results by pain physicians. METHODS: From June 2014 to June 2016, a total of 664 patients with chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) were seen for initial consult. Charts were reviewed and used to create a database containing sex, age, UDS result, physician, and medication/illicit drug history. For all unexpected UDS results, an interview was conducted with the treating physician to determine its clinical implications. RESULTS: For the general pain specialists, the overall percentage of patients with an unexpected UDS result was 16.67%. Excluding codeine, at most 4.47% of patients tested unexpectedly positive for a strong opioid. Although eight out of nine physicians found UDS helpful in general, only 29.58% of unexpected results were helpful in the management of their patients and directly influenced their care. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of an unexpected UDS result in patients with CNCP is significant. Most physicians agree that UDS is helpful but in only a limited number of cases did the unexpected result provide helpful information that significantly influenced patient care.

Contexte: Une revue systématique récente a démontré que peu d'études évaluaient la valeur du dépistage urinaire de drogue dans la prise en charge de la douleur chronique. L'Unité de prise en charge de la douleur d'Halifax, en Nouvelle-Écosse, a récement instauré le dépistage urinaire de drogue par spectrométrie de masse en tandem pour tous ses nouveaux patients.But: Éudier la prévalence de résultats inattendus lors du dépistage urinaire de drogue par spectométrie de masse en tandem dans un centre de la douleur chronique en milieu hospitalier, afin d'évaluer quelle drogues sont les plus susceptibles de donner lieu à un résultat inattendu et à la fois évaluer l'utilisation clinique des résultats inattendus par les médecins spécialisés dans le traitement de la douleur.Méthodes: De juin 2014 à juin 2016, 664 patients souffrant de douleur chronique non cancéreuse ont été vus pour une consultation initiale. Leurs dossiers ont été étudiés et utilisés pour créer une base de données contenant leur sexe, leur âge, le résultat obtenu lors du dépistage urinaire de drogue, leur médecin traitant et leurs antécédents en matière de médication ou de drogues illicites. Pour tous les résultats de dépistage urinaire de drogue inattendus, une entrevue a eu lieu avec le médecin traitant afin d'en déterminer les implications cliniques.Résultats: Pour les spécialistes de la douleur générale, le pourcentage global de patients ayant obtenu un résultat inattendu lors du dépistage urinaire de drogue était de 16,67 %. À l'exclusion de la codéine, tout au plus 4,47% des patients ont obtenu un résultat positif inattendu pour un opioïde puissant. Bien que huit médecins sur neuf aient trouvé le dépistage urinaire de drogue utile en général, seulement 29,58% des résultats inattendus ont été utiles dans la prise en charge de leurs patients et ont influencé directements les soins prodigués.Conclusions: La prévalence d'un résultat inattendu lors du dépistage urinaire de drogue chez les patients souffrant de douleur chronique non cancéreuse est élevée. La plupart des médecins sont d'accord pour dire que le dépistage urinaire de drogue est utile, mais que le résultat inattendu a fourni de l'information utile ayant influencé les soins aux patients de manière significative seulement dans un nombre limité de cas.

A prospective observational study of problematic oral cannabinoid use.

BACKGROUND: Despite evidence supporting the benefits of cannabinoids for symptom control across a wide range of medical conditions, concerns have been raised regarding the potential misuse and/or problematic use of cannabinoids (CBs). OBJECTIVE: The first objective of this study was to examine the incidence of problematic prescription cannabinoid use (PPCBU) over a 12-month period among patients initiating cannabinoid therapy. The second objective was to examine the factors associated with PPCBU. A total of 265 patients who were prescribed oral cannabinoid therapy as part of usual medical practice were enrolled into this prospective observational study. Patients first completed a series of baseline questionnaires assessing demographic, clinical, and substance use variables. Three measures designed to assess PPCBU were then administered at 3, 6, and 12 months after initiation of cannabinoid therapy. RESULTS: At each of the follow-up assessment time points, a significantly greater number of patients scored below (vs above) cutoff scores on the three main PPCBU outcomes (all p's < .001). At any follow-up time point, a maximum of roughly 25% of patients demonstrated PPCBU. Heightened odds of PPCBU were observed among patients with a history of psychiatric problems, tobacco smokers, and recreational cannabis users (all p's < .05). Results indicated that past-year substance abuse, assessed using the DAST-20, was the strongest predictor of PPCBU (p < .005). CONCLUSION: Findings from the present study could have implications for clinicians considering the use of cannabinoids for the management of patients with medical conditions. Although results indicated that the majority of patients included in this study did not reach cutoff scores on the three main PPCBU outcomes, our findings suggest that PPCBU should be routinely assessed and monitored over the course of cannabinoid therapy, particularly among patients with a history of psychiatric or substance use problems.

Qigong and Fibromyalgia circa 2017.

Qigong is an internal art practice with a long history in China. It is currently characterized as meditative movement (or as movement-based embodied contemplative practice), but is also considered as complementary and alternative exercise or mind-body therapy. There are now six controlled trials and nine other reports on the effects of qigong in fibromyalgia. Outcomes are related to amount of practice so it is important to consider this factor in overview analyses. If one considers the 4 trials (201 subjects) that involve diligent practice (30-45 min daily, 6-8 weeks), there are consistent benefits in pain, sleep, impact, and physical and mental function following the regimen, with benefits maintained at 4-6 months. Effect sizes are consistently in the large range. There are also reports of even more extensive practice of qigong for 1-3 years, even up to a decade, indicating marked benefits in other health areas beyond core domains for fibromyalgia. While the latter reports involve a limited number of subjects and represent a self-selected population, the marked health benefits that occur are noteworthy. Qigong merits further study as a complementary practice for those with fibromyalgia. Current treatment guidelines do not consider amount of practice, and usually make indeterminate recommendations.

Long-Term Outcomes in the Management of Painful Diabetic Neuropathy.

BACKGROUND: Painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN) is a frequent complication of diabetes mellitus. Current treatment recommendations are based on short-term trials, generally of ≤3 months' duration. Limited data are available on the long-term outcomes of this chronic disease. The objective of this study was to determine the long-term clinical effectiveness of the management of chronic PDN at tertiary pain centres. METHODS: From a prospective observational cohort study of patients with chronic neuropathic non-cancer pain recruited from seven Canadian tertiary pain centres, 60 patients diagnosed with PDN were identified for analysis. Data were collected according to Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials guidelines including the Brief Pain Inventory. RESULTS: At 12-month follow-up, 37.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 23.0-53.3) of 43 patients with complete data achieved pain reduction of ≥30%, 51.2% (95% CI, 35.5-66.7) achieved functional improvement with a reduction of ≥1 on the Pain Interference Scale (0-10, Brief Pain Inventory) and 30.2% (95% CI, 17.2-46.1) had achieved both these measures. Symptom management included at least two medication classes in 55.3% and three medication classes in 25.5% (opioids, antidepressants, anticonvulsants). CONCLUSIONS: Almost one-third of patients being managed for PDN in a tertiary care setting achieve meaningful improvements in pain and function in the long term. Polypharmacy including analgesic antidepressants and anticonvulsants were the mainstays of effective symptom management.

A double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover pilot trial with extension using an oral mucosal cannabinoid extract for treatment of chemotherapy-induced neuropathic pain.

CONTEXT: Neuropathic pain caused by chemotherapy limits dosing and duration of potentially life-saving anti-cancer treatment and impairs quality of life. Chemotherapeutic neuropathy responds poorly to conventional treatments, and there is an urgent medical need for new treatments. Recent preclinical studies demonstrate that cannabinoid agonists suppress established chemotherapy-evoked neuropathy. OBJECTIVES: This was a pilot trial to begin to investigate a currently available cannabinoid agent, nabiximols (oral mucosal spray containing cannabinoids), in the treatment of chemotherapy-induced neuropathic pain. METHODS: A randomized, placebo-controlled crossover pilot study was done in 16 patients with established chemotherapy-induced neuropathic pain. A 0-10 point numeric rating scale for pain intensity (NRS-PI) was used as the primary outcome measure. RESULTS: When examining the whole group, there was no statistically significant difference between the treatment and the placebo groups on the NRS-PI. A responder analysis demonstrated that there were five participants who reported a two-point or greater reduction in pain that trended toward statistical significance and the number needed to treat was five. CONCLUSION: Chemotherapy-induced neuropathic pain is particularly resistant to currently available treatments. This pilot trial found a number needed to treat of five and an average decrease of 2.6 on an 11-point NRS-PI in five "responders" (as compared with a decrease of 0.6 with placebo) and supports that it is worthwhile to study nabiximols in a full randomized, placebo-controlled trial of chemotherapy-induced neuropathic pain.

Cannabinoids for treatment of chronic non-cancer pain; a systematic review of randomized trials.

Effective therapeutic options for patients living with chronic pain are limited. The pain relieving effect of cannabinoids remains unclear. A systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining cannabinoids in the treatment of chronic non-cancer pain was conducted according to the PRISMA statement update on the QUORUM guidelines for reporting systematic reviews that evaluate health care interventions. Cannabinoids studied included smoked cannabis, oromucosal extracts of cannabis based medicine, nabilone, dronabinol and a novel THC analogue. Chronic non-cancer pain conditions included neuropathic pain, fibromyalgia, rheumatoid arthritis, and mixed chronic pain. Overall the quality of trials was excellent. Fifteen of the eighteen trials that met the inclusion criteria demonstrated a significant analgesic effect of cannabinoid as compared with placebo and several reported significant improvements in sleep. There were no serious adverse effects. Adverse effects most commonly reported were generally well tolerated, mild to moderate in severity and led to withdrawal from the studies in only a few cases. Overall there is evidence that cannabinoids are safe and modestly effective in neuropathic pain with preliminary evidence of efficacy in fibromyalgia and rheumatoid arthritis. The context of the need for additional treatments for chronic pain is reviewed. Further large studies of longer duration examining specific cannabinoids in homogeneous populations are required.

The pharmacotherapy of chronic pain.

Most patients with rheumatic diseases experience difficulties with chronic pain. To assist clinicians in directly addressing this pain, this article presents a treatment approach and algorithm based on best evidence. The usual approach for mild to moderate pain is to start with a nonopioid analgesic. If this is inadequate or poorly tolerated, and if there is an element of sleep loss, it is then reasonable to add an antidepressant with analgesic qualities. If there is a component of neuropathic pain or fibromyalgia, then a trial of one of the gabapentinoids is appropriate. If these steps are inadequate, then an opioid analgesic may be added. For moderate to severe pain, one would initiate a trial of chronic opioid earlier. Cannabinoids and topicals may also be appropriate as single agents or in combination.

The pharmacotherapy of chronic pain: a review.

The past two decades have contributed a large body of preclinical work that has assisted in our understanding of the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms that cause chronic pain. In this context, it has been recognized that effective treatment of pain is a priority and that treatment often involves the use of one or a combination of agents with analgesic action. The current review presents an evidence-based approach to the pharmacotherapy of chronic pain. Medline searches were done for all agents used as conventional treatment in chronic pain. Published papers up to June 2005 were included. The search strategy included randomized, controlled trials, and where available, systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Further references were found in reference sections of papers located using the above search strategy. Agents for which there were no controlled trials supporting efficacy in treatment of chronic pain were not included in the present review, except in cases where preclinical science was compelling, or where initial human work has been positive and where it was thought the reader would be interested in the scientific evidence to date.

Cannabis use for chronic non-cancer pain: results of a prospective survey.

There has been a surge in interest in medicinal cannabis in Canada. We conducted a questionnaire survey to determine the current prevalence of medicinal cannabis use among patients with chronic non-cancer pain, to estimate the dose size and frequency of cannabis use, and to describe the main symptoms for which relief was being sought. Over a 6-week period in mid-2001, 209 chronic non-cancer pain patients were recruited in an anonymous cross-sectional survey. Seventy-two (35%) subjects reported ever having used cannabis. Thirty-two (15%) subjects reported having used cannabis for pain relief (pain users), and 20 (10%) subjects were currently using cannabis for pain relief. Thirty-eight subjects denied using cannabis for pain relief (recreational users). Compared to never users, pain users were significantly younger (P=0.001) and were more likely to be tobacco users (P=0.0001). The largest group of patients using cannabis had pain caused by trauma and/or surgery (51%), and the site of pain was predominantly neck/upper body and myofascial (68% and 65%, respectively). The median duration of pain was similar in both pain users and recreational users (8 vs. 7 years; P=0.7). There was a wide range of amounts and frequency of cannabis use. Of the 32 subjects who used cannabis for pain, 17 (53%) used four puffs or less at each dosing interval, eight (25%) smoked a whole cannabis cigarette (joint) and four (12%) smoked more than one joint. Seven (22%) of these subjects used cannabis more than once daily, five (16%) used it daily, eight (25%) used it weekly and nine (28%) used it rarely. Pain, sleep and mood were most frequently reported as improving with cannabis use, and 'high' and dry mouth were the most commonly reported side effects. We conclude that cannabis use is prevalent among the chronic non-cancer pain population, for a wide range of symptoms, with considerable variability in the amounts used. Discussions between patients and health care providers concerning cannabis use may facilitate education and follow up, and would allow side effects and potential interactions with other medications to be monitored. Clinical trials of cannabis for chronic non-cancer pain are warranted.