Revision of an Adult Burn Center's Resuscitation Guideline Leads to Lower Resuscitation Requirements.

In 2018, the institutional burn resuscitation guideline was updated to remove the use of high-dose ascorbic acid (HDAA) therapy, to lower 24-hour resuscitation fluid estimations from 4 to 2 mL/kg/TBSA, and to optimize guidance around appropriate colloid resuscitation. This retrospective study compared the incidence of a composite safety outcome (acute kidney injury, or intra-abdominal hypertension requiring intervention) between the pre-guideline update to post-guideline update. Secondarily, 24-hour resuscitation volumes, hourly urine output, vasopressor use, and mechanical ventilation duration were compared as well. The composite safety outcome was similar between the 2 groups (40% vs 29%; p=0.27), but the post-group showed significantly lower 24-hour resuscitation volumes (3.74 mL/kg/TBSA vs 2.94 mL/kg/TBSA; p<0.01), as well as lower urine output (1.26 mL/kg/hr vs 0.75 mL/kg/hr; p<0.01). There was no difference between the groups with respect to vasopressor use, mechanical ventilation duration, or mortality. This study suggests that a simplified resuscitation protocol without HDAA, combined with a lower starting fluid rate led to significantly lower 24-hour resuscitation volumes without an increase in adverse safety events.

'The dark before the dawn': the 2021 British Thoracic Society Audit of the treatment of tobacco dependency in acute trusts.

Smoking remains the single largest cause of preventable death, disability and health inequality. Smoking tobacco directly contributes to over 500 000 hospital admissions each year, making hospitals an important location to optimise treatment for tobacco dependency. The third British Thoracic Society Tobacco Dependency Audit was undertaken to determine how effectively national standards for treating tobacco-dependent smokers have been implemented and assess if any progress has been made from previous audits. Data on 14579 patients from 119 hospitals revealed 21% of patients were current smokers, 45% were offered very brief advice and 5% prescribed combination nicotine replacement therapy or varenicline. Only 9% completed a consultation with a specialist tobacco dependency practitioner during their inpatient stay and fewer than 1% of smokers were abstinent at 4 weeks following discharge. Clinical leadership of tobacco dependency services was deficient, and staff were ill equipped in supporting current smokers in their efforts to quit with only 50% of trusts offering regular smoking cessation training. There has been little meaningful improvement from previous audits and there remains woefully inadequate provision of tobacco dependency treatment for patients who smoke. The National Health Service (NHS) Long Term Plan has committed substantial, new funding to the NHS to ensure every patient that smokes admitted to hospital will be offered evidence-based support and treatment for tobacco dependency. The findings of this audit highlight the urgency with which this programme must be implemented to tackle the greatest cause of premature death in the UK and to achieve the wider well-recognised benefits for the healthcare system.

Understanding the anatomy of a malpractice suit. In the United States this is a doctor's best defence.

In the United States, the majority of physicians have been sued and those who have not, will be. Defendants share the notion that the lawsuit is totally fallacious. To be fallacious, the outcome of a medical intervention must be an unpreventable random maloccurrence. This is the only alternative to a medical error. The conflict over outcomes that are random and outcomes that are medical errors results in 46,000 malpractice suits every year in the USA. The burden of proof is a preponderance of evidence, but this is insufficient to do more than just infer, not prove, a relationship between the medical intervention and the outcome. Plaintiffs, generally, prove a malpractice case using inductive reasoning. Inductive reasoning leaves much to intuition. They use inductive reasoning because, by definition, preponderance of evidence, also, leaves much to intuition. Deductive reasoning is objective and there is no place for intuition. With deductive reasoning, the burden of proof is now sufficient to distinguish whether or not the cause relates to the effect with 95% confidence. A model for deductive reasoning in malpractice which is completely consistent with the scientific method is presented. This should and would derail frivolous lawsuits.

Elevated anti-Mullerian hormone in lean women may not indicate polycystic ovarian syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) is a heterogeneous disorder with clinical features shared with functional hypogonadotrophic hypogonadism (FHH). AIM: To investigate the usefulness of an elevated (>40 pmol/L) anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) in identifying PCOS and distinguishing PCOS from FHH. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 141 patients with an elevated AMH and body mass index either <20 kg/m2 (lean) or >30 kg/m2 (obese) were selected and three subgroups analysed - obese, lean, lean with suspected FHH. FHH was diagnosed clinically, incorporating diet, weight and exercise history; confirmatory tests included pituitary MRIs, progestin challenges and endometrial thickness measurements. PCOS features of oligo/anovulation, polycystic ovarian morphology (PCOm) and hyperandrogenism were determined by clinical history, pelvic ultrasound, free androgen index and physical examination, respectively. Features of PCOS and blood levels of AMH, follicle-stimulating hormone, luteinising hormone, sex hormone binding globulin (SHBG) and testosterone were compared between subgroups. RESULTS: Of 141 patients with elevated AMH, 76 were obese and 65 lean. Greater than one-third of lean women had the clinical picture of FHH. Elevated AMH predicted PCOm and menstrual irregularity across all subgroups but uniquely associated with hyperandrogenism in the obese. Median AMH levels were similar among FHH and non-FHH women. Median SHBG levels were significantly higher (111 ± 73 vs 56 ± 31, P < 0.001) in lean women with FHH compared to those without FHH. CONCLUSIONS: PCOS and FHH share common features of elevated AMH levels, oligo-anovulation and polycystic ovarian morphology. AMH did not assist in differentiating FHH from PCOS. A higher SHBG level shows promise as a discriminatory finding in FHH.

Ovulatory disorders are an independent risk factor for pregnancy complications in women receiving assisted reproduction treatments.

BACKGROUND: Conception using assisted reproduction treatments (ART) has been associated with an increased risk of pregnancy complications. It is uncertain if this is caused by ART directly, or is an association of the underlying factors causing infertility. AIMS: We assessed the relationship between assisted conception (AC) and maternal or fetal complications in a large retrospective cohort study. In a nested cohort of women receiving infertility treatment, we determined if such risk rests predominantly with certain causes of infertility. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective database analysis of 50 381 women delivering a singleton pregnancy in four public hospital obstetric units in western Sydney, and a nested cohort of 508 women receiving ART at a single fertility centre, in whom the cause of infertility was known. RESULTS: A total of 1727 pregnancies followed AC; 48 654 were spontaneous conceptions. Adjusted for age, body mass index and smoking, AC was associated with increased risk of preterm delivery (OR 1.73, 95% CI 1.50-2.02), hypertension (OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.34-1.82) and diabetes (OR 1.51, 95% CI 1.30-1.75). In the nested cohort, ovulatory dysfunction was present in 145 women and 336 had infertility despite normal ovulatory function. Ovulatory dysfunction was associated with increased risk of diabetes (OR 2.94, 95% CI 1.72-5.02) and hypertension (OR 2.40, 95% CI 1.15-5.00) compared to women with normal ovulatory function. CONCLUSIONS: Assisted conception is associated with increased risk of pregnancy complications. This risk appears greatest for women whose underlying infertility involves ovulatory dysfunction. Such disorders probably predispose towards diabetes and hypertension, which is then exacerbated by pregnancy.

Painful boney metastases.

Up to 90% of patients with metastatic or advanced stage cancer will experience significant cancer-related pain. Approximately half or more of patients diagnosed with cancer may experience bone pain. It has been estimated that tumor metastases to the skeleton affects roughly 400,000 US citizens annually. Carcinoma from breast, lung, and prostate cancers account for approximately 80% of secondary metastatic bone disease. Bone metastases may cause devastating clinical complications associated with dramatic reductions in quality of life, mobility, and independence, as well as excruciating refractory pain. Associated complications from osseous metastases also present a substantial economic burden. Currently, there are still a significantly high number of patients suffering with unrelieved pain from osseous metastases. Treatments for painful osseous metastases may not only diminish pain but also may improve quality of life and independence/mobility, and reduce skeletal morbidity, potential pathologic fractures, spinal cord compression, and other "skeletal-related events." Treatment strategies for painful osseous metastases include the following: systemic analgesics, intrathecal analgesics, glucocorticoids, radiation (external beam radiation, radiopharmaceuticals), ablative techniques (radiofrequency ablation and cryoablation), bisphosphonates, chemotherapeutic agents, inhibitors of RANKL-RANK interaction (eg, denosumab), hormonal therapies, interventional techniques (eg, kyphoplasty), and surgical approaches. Although the mechanisms underlying the development of bone metastases remain incompletely understood, there appears to be important bi-directional interactions between the tumor and the bone microenvironment. A greater understanding of the pathophysiology of painful osseous metastases may lead to better and more selective targeted analgesic therapy. Additionally, potential future therapeutic approaches to painful osseous metastases may revolutionize approaches to analgesia for this condition, leading to optimal outcomes with maximal pain relief and minimal adverse effects.

Neuromodulation and palliative medicine.

The palliative care population is generally vulnerable to experiencing medication-induced adverse effects and drug-drug interactions. Neuromodulation may offer particular advantages over systemic medications in this population. Spinal cord stimulation and peripheral nerve stimulation have long been utilized in efforts to provide analgesia for various painful conditions. More recently, deep brain stimulation/motor cortex stimulation has anecdotally been utilized for certain intractable pain states. Although brain electrical stimulation has not been adequately trialed or in some cases even tried at all for management of a variety of symptoms, it is conceivable that in the future it may be a potential therapeutic option in efforts to palliate various severe refractory symptoms (eg, intractable pain, nausea, dyspnea, delirium).

Chronic pain treatment with opioid analgesics: benefits versus harms of long-term therapy.

Chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) is a disabling chronic condition with a high prevalence rate around the world. Opioids are routinely prescribed for treatment of chronic pain (CP). In the past two decades there has been a massive increase in the number of opioid prescriptions, prescribed daily opioid doses and overall opioid availability. Many more patients with CNCP receive high doses of long-acting opioids on a long-term basis. Yet CP and related disability rates remain high, and majority of the patients with CNCP are dissatisfied with their treatments. Intersecting with the upward trajectory in opioid use are the increasing trends in opioid related adverse effects, especially prescription drug abuse, addiction and overdose deaths. This complex situation raises questions on the relevance of opioid therapy in the treatment of CNCP. This article reviews current evidence on opioid effectiveness, the benefits and harms of long-term therapy in CNCP.

Painful boney metastases.

Boney metastasis may lead to terrible suffering from debilitating pain. The most likely malignancies that spread to bone are prostate, breast, and lung. Painful osseous metastases are typically associated with multiple episodes of breakthrough pain which may occur with activities of daily living, weight bearing, lifting, coughing, and sneezing. Almost half of these breakthrough pain episodes are rapid in onset and short in duration and 44% of episodes are unpredictable. Treatment strategies include: analgesic approaches with "triple opioid therapy", bisphosphonates, chemotherapeutic agents, hormonal therapy, interventional and surgical approaches, steroids, radiation (external beam radiation, radiopharmaceuticals), ablative techniques (radiofrequency ablation, cryoablation), and intrathecal analgesics.

Intravenous infusions in chronic pain management.

In the United States, millions of Americans are affected by chronic pain, which adds heavily to national rates of morbidity, mortality, and disability, with an ever-increasing prevalence. According to a 2011 report titled Relieving Pain in America: A Blueprint for Transforming Prevention, Care, Education, and Research by the Institute of Medicine of the National Academies, pain not only exacts its toll on people's lives but also on the economy with an estimated annual economic cost of at least $560 - 635 billion in health care costs and the cost of lost productivity attributed to chronic pain. Intravenous infusions of certain pharmacologic agents have been known to provide substantial pain relief in patients with various chronic painful conditions. Some of these infusions are better, and although not necessarily the first therapeutic choice, have been widely used and extensively studied. The others show promise, however are in need of further investigations. This article will focus on non-opiate intravenous infusions that have been utilized for chronic painful disorders such as fibromyalgia, neuropathic pain, phantom limb pain, post-herpetic neuralgia, complex regional pain syndromes (CRPS), diabetic neuropathy, and central pain related to stroke or spinal cord injuries. The management of patients with chronic pain conditions is challenging and continues to evolve as new treatment modalities are explored and tested. The following intravenous infusions used to treat the aforementioned chronic pain conditions will be reviewed: lidocaine, ketamine, phentolamine, dexmedetomidine, and bisphosphonates. This overview is intended to familiarize the practitioner with the variety of infusions for patients with chronic pain. It will not, however, be able to provide guidelines for their use due to the lack of sufficient evidence.

An update of comprehensive evidence-based guidelines for interventional techniques in chronic spinal pain. Part II: guidance and recommendations.

OBJECTIVE: To develop evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for interventional techniques in the diagnosis and treatment of chronic spinal pain. METHODOLOGY: Systematic assessment of the literature. EVIDENCE: I. Lumbar Spine • The evidence for accuracy of diagnostic selective nerve root blocks is limited; whereas for lumbar provocation discography, it is fair. • The evidence for diagnostic lumbar facet joint nerve blocks and diagnostic sacroiliac intraarticular injections is good with 75% to 100% pain relief as criterion standard with controlled local anesthetic or placebo blocks. • The evidence is good in managing disc herniation or radiculitis for caudal, interlaminar, and transforaminal epidural injections; fair for axial or discogenic pain without disc herniation, radiculitis or facet joint pain with caudal, and interlaminar epidural injections, and limited for transforaminal epidural injections; fair for spinal stenosis with caudal, interlaminar, and transforaminal epidural injections; and fair for post surgery syndrome with caudal epidural injections and limited with transforaminal epidural injections. • The evidence for therapeutic facet joint interventions is good for conventional radiofrequency, limited for pulsed radiofrequency, fair to good for lumbar facet joint nerve blocks, and limited for intraarticular injections. • For sacroiliac joint interventions, the evidence for cooled radiofrequency neurotomy is fair; limited for intraarticular injections and periarticular injections; and limited for both pulsed radiofrequency and conventional radiofrequency neurotomy. • For lumbar percutaneous adhesiolysis, the evidence is fair in managing chronic low back and lower extremity pain secondary to post surgery syndrome and spinal stenosis. • For intradiscal procedures, the evidence for intradiscal electrothermal therapy (IDET) and biaculoplasty is limited to fair and is limited for discTRODE. • For percutaneous disc decompression, the evidence is limited for automated percutaneous lumbar discectomy (APLD), percutaneous lumbar laser disc decompression, and Dekompressor; and limited to fair for nucleoplasty for which the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has issued a noncoverage decision. II. Cervical Spine • The evidence for cervical provocation discography is limited; whereas the evidence for diagnostic cervical facet joint nerve blocks is good with a criterion standard of 75% or greater relief with controlled diagnostic blocks. • The evidence is good for cervical interlaminar epidural injections for cervical disc herniation or radiculitis; fair for axial or discogenic pain, spinal stenosis, and post cervical surgery syndrome. • The evidence for therapeutic cervical facet joint interventions is fair for conventional cervical radiofrequency neurotomy and cervical medial branch blocks, and limited for cervical intraarticular injections. III. Thoracic Spine • The evidence is limited for thoracic provocation discography and is good for diagnostic accuracy of thoracic facet joint nerve blocks with a criterion standard of at least 75% pain relief with controlled diagnostic blocks. • The evidence is fair for thoracic epidural injections in managing thoracic pain. • The evidence for therapeutic thoracic facet joint nerve blocks is fair, limited for radiofrequency neurotomy, and not available for thoracic intraarticular injections. IV. Implantables • The evidence is fair for spinal cord stimulation (SCS) in managing patients with failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) and limited for implantable intrathecal drug administration systems. V. ANTICOAGULATION • There is good evidence for risk of thromboembolic phenomenon in patients with antithrombotic therapy if discontinued, spontaneous epidural hematomas with or without traumatic injury in patients with or without anticoagulant therapy to discontinue or normalize INR with warfarin therapy, and the lack of necessity of discontinuation of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), including low dose aspirin prior to performing interventional techniques. • There is fair evidence with excessive bleeding, including epidural hematoma formation with interventional techniques when antithrombotic therapy is continued, the risk of higher thromboembolic phenomenon than epidural hematomas with discontinuation of antiplatelet therapy prior to interventional techniques and to continue phosphodiesterase inhibitors (dipyridamole, cilostazol, and Aggrenox). • There is limited evidence to discontinue antiplatelet therapy with platelet aggregation inhibitors to avoid bleeding and epidural hematomas and/or to continue antiplatelet therapy (clopidogrel, ticlopidine, prasugrel) during interventional techniques to avoid cerebrovascular and cardiovascular thromboembolic fatalities. • There is limited evidence in reference to newer antithrombotic agents dabigatran (Pradaxa) and rivaroxan (Xarelto) to discontinue to avoid bleeding and epidural hematomas and are continued during interventional techniques to avoid cerebrovascular and cardiovascular thromboembolic events. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence is fair to good for 62% of diagnostic and 52% of therapeutic interventions assessed. DISCLAIMER: The authors are solely responsible for the content of this article. No statement on this article should be construed as an official position of ASIPP. The guidelines do not represent "standard of care."

Intrathecal infusion systems for long-term management of chronic non-cancer pain: an update of assessment of evidence.

BACKGROUND: Intrathecal infusion systems are often used for patients with intractable pain when all else fails, including surgery. There is, however, some concern as to the effectiveness and safety of this treatment. STUDY DESIGN:   A systematic review of intrathecal infusion systems for long-term management of chronic non-cancer pain. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and update the effect of intrathecal infusion systems in managing chronic non-cancer pain. METHODS: The available literature on intrathecal infusion systems in managing chronic pain was reviewed. The quality assessment and clinical relevance criteria utilized were the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Review Group criteria as utilized for interventional techniques for randomized trials and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale criteria for observational studies. The level of evidence was classified as good, fair, and limited or poor based on the quality of evidence developed by the U.S. Preventative Services Task Force (USPSTF). Data sources included relevant literature identified through searches of PubMed and EMBASE from 1966 to December 2012, and manual searches of the bibliographies of known primary and review articles. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was pain relief with short-term relief < 12 months and long-term relief ≥ 12 months. Secondary outcome measures were improvement in functional status, psychological status, return to work, and reduction in opioid intake. RESULTS: There were 28 studies identified for this systematic review. Of these, 21 were excluded from further review. A total of 7 non-randomized studies met inclusion criteria for methodological quality assessment. No randomized trials met the inclusion requirements.The evidence is limited based on observational studies. LIMITATIONS: The limitations of this systematic review include the paucity of literature. CONCLUSION: The evidence is limited for intrathecal infusion systems.

Botulinum toxins: mechanisms of action, antinociception and clinical applications.

Botulinum toxin (BoNT) is a potent neurotoxin that is produced by the gram-positive, spore-forming, anaerobic bacterium, Clostridum botulinum. There are 7 known immunologically distinct serotypes of BoNT: types A, B, C1, D, E, F, and G. Clostridum neurotoxins are produced as a single inactive polypeptide chain of 150kDa, which is cleaved by tissue proteinases into an active di-chain molecule: a heavy chain (H) of ∼100 kDa and a light chain (L) of ∼50 kDa held together by a single disulfide bond. Each serotype demonstrates its own varied mechanisms of action and duration of effect. The heavy chain of each BoNT serotype binds to its specific neuronal ecto-acceptor, whereby, membrane translocation and endocytosis by intracellular synaptic vesicles occurs. The light chain acts to cleave SNAP-25, which inhibits synaptic exocytosis, and therefore, disables neural transmission. The action of BoNT to block the release of acetylcholine botulinum toxin at the neuromuscular junction is best understood, however, most experts acknowledge that this effect alone appears inadequate to explain the entirety of the neurotoxin's apparent analgesic activity. Consequently, scientific and clinical evidence has emerged that suggests multiple antinociceptive mechanisms for botulinum toxins in a variety of painful disorders, including: chronic musculoskeletal, neurological, pelvic, perineal, osteoarticular, and some headache conditions.

American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP) guidelines for responsible opioid prescribing in chronic non-cancer pain: Part I--evidence assessment.

BACKGROUND: Opioid abuse has continued to increase at an alarming rate since the 1990 s. As documented by different medical specialties, medical boards, advocacy groups, and the Drug Enforcement Administration, available evidence suggests a wide variance in chronic opioid therapy of 90 days or longer in chronic non-cancer pain. Part 1 describes evidence assessment. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of opioid guidelines as issued by the American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP) are to provide guidance for the use of opioids for the treatment of chronic non-cancer pain, to produce consistency in the application of an opioid philosophy among the many diverse groups involved, to improve the treatment of chronic non-cancer pain, and to reduce the incidence of abuse and drug diversion. The focus of these guidelines is to curtail the abuse of opioids without jeopardizing non-cancer pain management with opioids. RESULTS: 1) There is good evidence that non-medical use of opioids is extensive; one-third of chronic pain patients may not use prescribed opioids as prescribed or may abuse them, and illicit drug use is significantly higher in these patients. 2) There is good evidence that opioid prescriptions are increasing rapidly, as the majority of prescriptions are from non-pain physicians, many patients are on long-acting opioids, and many patients are provided with combinations of long-acting and short-acting opioids. 3) There is good evidence that the increased supply of opioids, use of high dose opioids, doctor shoppers, and patients with multiple comorbid factors contribute to the majority of the fatalities. 4) There is fair evidence that long-acting opioids and a combination of long-acting and short-acting opioids contribute to increasing fatalities and that even low-doses of 40 mg or 50 mg of daily morphine equivalent doses may be responsible for emergency room admissions with overdoses and deaths. 5) There is good evidence that approximately 60% of fatalities originate from opioids prescribed within the guidelines, with approximately 40% of fatalities occurring in 10% of drug abusers. 6) The short-term effectiveness of opioids is fair, whereas the long-term effectiveness of opioids is limited due to a lack of long-term (> 3 months) high quality studies, with fair evidence with no significant difference between long-acting and short-acting opioids. 7) Among the individual drugs, most opioids have fair evidence for short-term and limited evidence for long-term due to a lack of quality studies. 8) The evidence for the effectiveness and safety of chronic opioid therapy in the elderly for chronic non-cancer pain is fair for short-term and limited for long-term due to lack of high quality studies; limited in children and adolescents and patients with comorbid psychological disorders due to lack of quality studies; and the evidence is poor in pregnant women. 9) There is limited evidence for reliability and accuracy of screening tests for opioid abuse due to lack of high quality studies. 10) There is fair evidence to support the identification of patients who are non-compliant or abusing prescription drugs or illicit drugs through urine drug testing and prescription drug monitoring programs, both of which can reduce prescription drug abuse or doctor shopping. DISCLAIMER: The guidelines are based on the best available evidence and do not constitute inflexible treatment recommendations. Due to the changing body of evidence, this document is not intended to be a "standard of care."

American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP) guidelines for responsible opioid prescribing in chronic non-cancer pain: Part 2--guidance.

RESULTS: Part 2 of the guidelines on responsible opioid prescribing provides the following recommendations for initiating and maintaining chronic opioid therapy of 90 days or longer. 1. A) Comprehensive assessment and documentation is recommended before initiating opioid therapy, including documentation of comprehensive history, general medical condition, psychosocial history, psychiatric status, and substance use history. ( EVIDENCE: good) B) Despite limited evidence for reliability and accuracy, screening for opioid use is recommended, as it will identify opioid abusers and reduce opioid abuse. ( EVIDENCE: limited) C) Prescription monitoring programs must be implemented, as they provide data on patterns of prescription usage, reduce prescription drug abuse or doctor shopping. ( EVIDENCE: good to fair) D) Urine drug testing (UDT) must be implemented from initiation along with subsequent adherence monitoring to decrease prescription drug abuse or illicit drug use when patients are in chronic pain management therapy. ( EVIDENCE: good) 2. A) Establish appropriate physical diagnosis and psychological diagnosis if available prior to initiating opioid therapy. ( EVIDENCE: good) B) Caution must be exercised in ordering various imaging and other evaluations, interpretation and communication with the patient, to avoid increased fear, activity restriction, requests for increased opioids, and maladaptive behaviors. ( EVIDENCE: good) C) Stratify patients into one of the 3 risk categories - low, medium, or high risk. D) A pain management consultation, may assist non-pain physicians, if high-dose opioid therapy is utilized. ( EVIDENCE: fair) 3. Essential to establish medical necessity prior to initiation or maintenance of opioid therapy. ( EVIDENCE: good) 4. Establish treatment goals of opioid therapy with regard to pain relief and improvement in function. ( EVIDENCE: good) 5. A) Long-acting opioids in high doses are recommended only in specific circumstances with severe intractable pain that is not amenable to short-acting or moderate doses of long-acting opioids, as there is no significant difference between long-acting and short-acting opioids for their effectiveness or adverse effects. ( EVIDENCE: fair) B) The relative and absolute contraindications to opioid use in chronic non-cancer pain must be evaluated including respiratory instability, acute psychiatric instability, uncontrolled suicide risk, active or history of alcohol or substance abuse, confirmed allergy to opioid agents, coadministration of drugs capable of inducing life-limiting drug interaction, concomitant use of benzodiazepines, active diversion of controlled substances, and concomitant use of heavy doses of central nervous system depressants. ( EVIDENCE: fair to limited) 6. A robust agreement which is followed by all parties is essential in initiating and maintaining opioid therapy as such agreements reduce overuse, misuse, abuse, and diversion. ( EVIDENCE: fair) 7. A) Once medical necessity is established, opioid therapy may be initiated with low doses and short-acting drugs with appropriate monitoring to provide effective relief and avoid side effects. ( EVIDENCE: fair for short-term effectiveness, limited for long-term effectiveness) B) Up to 40 mg of morphine equivalent is considered as low dose, 41 to 90 mg of morphine equivalent as a moderate dose, and greater than 91 mg of morphine equivalence as high dose. ( EVIDENCE: fair) C) In reference to long-acting opioids, titration must be carried out with caution and overdose and misuse must be avoided. ( EVIDENCE: good) 8. A) Methadone is recommended for use in late stages after failure of other opioid therapy and only by clinicians with specific training in the risks and uses. ( EVIDENCE: limited) B) Monitoring recommendation for methadone prescription is that an electrocardiogram should be obtained prior to initiation, at 30 days and yearly thereafter. ( EVIDENCE: fair) 9. In order to reduce prescription drug abuse and doctor shopping, adherence monitoring by UDT and PMDPs provide evidence that is essential to the identification of those patients who are non-compliant or abusing prescription drugs or illicit drugs. ( EVIDENCE: fair) 10. Constipation must be closely monitored and a bowel regimen be initiated as soon as deemed necessary. ( EVIDENCE: good) 11. Chronic opioid therapy may be continued, with continuous adherence monitoring, in well-selected populations, in conjunction with or after failure of other modalities of treatments with improvement in physical and functional status and minimal adverse effects. ( EVIDENCE: fair). DISCLAIMER: The guidelines are based on the best available evidence and do not constitute inflexible treatment recommendations. Due to the changing body of evidence, this document is not intended to be a "standard of care."

A comprehensive review of rapid-onset opioids for breakthrough pain.

Breakthrough pain (BTP) is a transitory pain (reaching maximum severity in ~15 minutes and lasting ~60 minutes in patients with cancer) that occurs despite the management of chronic pain with long-term around-the-clock analgesia. BTP occurs in 33-65% of patients with chronic cancer pain and in ~70% of patients with chronic noncancer pain. BTP has historically been managed with short-acting opioids; however, these medications have a pharmacokinetic profile that does not correlate with the sudden onset and short time to maximum severity of BTP. Interest in rapid-onset opioids to relieve BTP has therefore been growing. This comprehensive review aims to summarize the currently available clinical data for the approved rapid-onset opioids, which comprise different formulations of fentanyl, a µ-opioid receptor agonist with anaesthetic and analgesic properties. Administration routes for fentanyl in the management of BTP currently include the transmucosal and intranasal routes; an intrapulmonary formulation is also in development. The findings of this review suggest that the efficacy and safety of the approved rapid-onset opioids are comparable.

Effectiveness of therapeutic lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injections in managing lumbar spinal pain.

BACKGROUND: Among the multiple interventions used in managing chronic spinal pain, lumbar epidural injections have been used extensively to treat lumbar radicular pain. Among caudal, interlaminar, and transforaminal, transforaminal epidural injections have gained rapid and widespread acceptance for the treatment of lumbar and lower extremity pain. The potential advantages of transforaminal over interlaminar and caudal, include targeted delivery of a steroid to the site of pathology, presumably onto an inflamed nerve root. However, there are only a few well-designed, randomized, controlled studies on the effectiveness of steroid injections. Consequently, multiple systematic reviews with diverse opinions have been published. STUDY DESIGN: A systematic review of therapeutic transforaminal epidural injection therapy for low back and lower extremity pain. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of therapeutic transforaminal lumbar epidural steroid injections in managing low back and lower extremity pain. METHODS: The available literature on lumbar transforaminal epidural injections in managing chronic low back and lower extremity pain was reviewed. The quality assessment and clinical relevance criteria utilized were the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Review Group criteria as utilized for interventional techniques for randomized trials and by the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale criteria for observational studies. Data sources included relevant literature identified through searches of PubMed and EMBASE from 1966 to December 2011, and manual searches of the bibliographies of known primary and review articles. The level of evidence was classified as good, fair, or poor based on the quality of evidence developed by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF). OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was pain relief (short-term relief = up to 6 months and long-term > 6 months). Secondary outcome measures were improvement in functional status, psychological status, return to work, and reduction in opioid intake. RESULTS: For this systematic review, 70 studies were identified. Of these, 43 studies were excluded and a total of 27 studies met inclusion criteria for methodological quality assessment with 15 randomized trials (with 2 duplicate publications) and 10 non-randomized studies. For lumbar disc herniation, the evidence is good for transforaminal epidural with local anesthetic and steroids, whereas it was fair for local anesthetics alone and the ability of transforaminal epidural injections to prevent surgery. For spinal stenosis, the available evidence is fair for local anesthetic and steroids. The evidence for axial low back pain and post lumbar surgery syndrome is poor, inadequate, limited, or unavailable. LIMITATIONS: The limitations of this systematic review include the paucity of literature. CONCLUSION: In summary, the evidence is good for radiculitis secondary to disc herniation with local anesthetics and steroids and fair with local anesthetic only; it is fair for radiculitis secondary to spinal stenosis with local anesthetic and steroids; and limited for axial pain and post surgery syndrome using local anesthetic with or without steroids.

Strategic planning to reduce medical errors: Part II--therapy.

In Part I of this series, medical errors were analyzed from a systems dynamics viewpoint. It was noted that despite extensive dialogue and a continuing stream of proposed medical practice revisions, medical errors and adverse impacts persist. Connectivity of vital elements is often underestimated or not fully understood. In Part II, our analysis suggests that the most fruitful strategies for dissolving medical errors include facilitating physician learning, educating patients about appropriate expectations surrounding treatment regimens, and creating "systematic" patient protections rather than depending on (nonexistent) perfect providers.