The attitudes of Turkish physicians in the treatment of fibromyalgia; is 'Pregabalinophobia' the new reality of pain medicine?

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to determine the treatment preferences of physicians interested in fibromyalgia treatment and to investigate their hesitations about prescribing pregabalin. METHODS: Our survey study was conducted between February 5 and 20, 2021. The survey forms were sent to the known email addresses and phone numbers of 1569 physical medicine and rehabilitation (PMR), algology, and rheumatology physicians. The replies to the surveys were checked for possible resubmissions. The pooled data were evaluated with the SPSS 22.0 statistical package program. Frequency distributions were calculated and presented as n, %. RESULTS: Four hundred and six PMR, rheumatology, and algology specialists fulfilled the study forms. About 59.0% of physicians stated that they prefer duloxetine as the first-line agent of fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) treatment. Pregabalin was only 6.0% of the physicians' first choice for FMS. About 35.0% of the participating physicians stated that the PMR department should follow up FMS patients. About 44.3% of the participants noted that they refer FMS patients to other departments which interested in FMS treatment and do not want to follow-up FMS patients. About 81% agreed that pregabalin causes addiction. About 36.7% stated that at least 20% of the patients could abuse pregabalin and 97.8% of physicians stated that they were prejudiced about prescribing pregabalin to prisoners. Approximately two of the three physicians experienced an act of violence in their hospital regarding pregabalin prescribing. CONCLUSION: These data showed that the 'Pregabalinophobia' should be accepted. This condition is associated with life safety concerns of the physician not only from unreliability of the drug. It seems that the doctors have valid reasons to develop this prejudice.

Common Mistakes in the Dual-Energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA) in Turkey. A Retrospective Descriptive Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: Osteoporosis is a widespread metabolic bone disease representing a global public health problem currently affecting more than two hundred million people worldwide. The World Health Organization states that dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the best densitometric technique for assessing bone mineral density (BMD). DXA provides an accurate diagnosis of osteoporosis, a good estimation of fracture risk, and is a useful tool for monitoring patients undergoing treatment. Common mistakes in BMD testing can be divided into four principal categories: 1) indication errors, 2) lack of quality control and calibration, 3) analysis and interpretation errors, and 4) inappropriate acquisition techniques. The aim of this retrospective multicenter descriptive study is to identify the common errors in the application of the DXA technique in Turkey. METHODS: All DXA scans performed during the observation period were included in the study if the measurements of both, the lumbar spine and proximal femur were recorded. Forearm measurement, total body measurements, and measurements performed on children were excluded. Each examination was surveyed by 30 consultants from 20 different centers each informed and trained in the principles of and the standards for DXA scanning before the study. RESULTS: A total of 3,212 DXA scan results from 20 different centers in 15 different Turkish cities were collected. The percentage of the discovered erroneous measurements varied from 10.5% to 65.5% in the lumbar spine and from 21.3% to 74.2% in the proximal femur. The overall error rate was found to be 31.8% (n = 1021) for the lumbar spine and 49.0% (n = 1576) for the proximal femur. CONCLUSION: In Turkey, DXA measurements of BMD have been in use for over 20 years, and examination processes continue to improve. There is no educational standard for operator training, and a lack of knowledge can lead to significant errors in the acquisition, analysis, and interpretation.

The prevalence of fibromyalgia and its relation with headache characteristics in episodic migraine.

The objective of this study was to assess the prevalence of fibromyalgia (FM) in patients with episodic migraine and to evaluate the relationship between migraine characteristics and FM. One hundred and eighteen consecutive patients (mean age = 38 years, 75% women) fulfilling the International Classification of Headache Disorders-II criteria for migraine with (n = 22) and without (n = 96) aura from an outpatient headache clinic of a university hospital were evaluated. The diagnosis of FM was made based on the 1990 American College of Rheumatology classification criteria. Participants completed some self-administered questionnaires ascertaining sociodemographics, headache severity, frequency and duration, headache-related disability (Headache Impact Test [HIT-6]) and Migraine Disability Assessment Scale, widespread musculoskeletal pain (visual analog scale), depression (Beck depression inventory), anxiety (Beck anxiety inventory), sleep quality (Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index), fatigue (Multidimensional Assessment of Fatigue), and quality of life (Short Form-36 Health Survey [SF-36]). In patients with FM, the tender point count and the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire were employed. FM was diagnosed in 37 (31.4%) of the patients. FM comorbidity was equally distributed across patients with and without aura. Severity of migraine headache, HIT-6, and anxiety were especially associated with FM comorbidity. Patients suffering from migraine plus FM reported lower scores on all items of the SF-36. This study indicates that the assessment and management of coexisting FM should be taken into account in the assessment and management of migraine, particularly when headache is severe or patients suffer from widespread musculoskeletal pain.