Variability in the prevalence of depression among adults with chronic pain: UK Biobank analysis through clinical prediction models.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of depression among people with chronic pain remains unclear due to the heterogeneity of study samples and definitions of depression. We aimed to identify sources of variation in the prevalence of depression among people with chronic pain and generate clinical prediction models to estimate the probability of depression among individuals with chronic pain. METHODS: Participants were from the UK Biobank. The primary outcome was a "lifetime" history of depression. The model's performance was evaluated using discrimination (optimism-corrected C statistic) and calibration (calibration plot). RESULTS: Analyses included 24,405 patients with chronic pain (mean age 64.1 years). Among participants with chronic widespread pain, the prevalence of having a "lifetime" history of depression was 45.7% and varied (25.0-66.7%) depending on patient characteristics. The final clinical prediction model (optimism-corrected C statistic: 0.66; good calibration on the calibration plot) included age, BMI, smoking status, physical activity, socioeconomic status, gender, history of asthma, history of heart failure, and history of peripheral artery disease. Among participants with chronic regional pain, the prevalence of having a "lifetime" history of depression was 30.2% and varied (21.4-70.6%) depending on patient characteristics. The final clinical prediction model (optimism-corrected C statistic: 0.65; good calibration on the calibration plot) included age, gender, nature of pain, smoking status, regular opioid use, history of asthma, pain location that bothers you most, and BMI. CONCLUSIONS: There was substantial variability in the prevalence of depression among patients with chronic pain. Clinically relevant factors were selected to develop prediction models. Clinicians can use these models to assess patients' treatment needs. These predictors are convenient to collect during daily practice, making it easy for busy clinicians to use them.

Optimal cut-offs of depression screening tools during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Studies have reported an increase in the prevalence of depression during the COVID-19 pandemic. The accuracy of screening tools may change with the prevalence and distribution of a disease in a population or sample: the "Spectrum Effect". METHODS: First, we selected commonly used screening tools and developed search strategies for the inclusion of original studies during the pandemic. Second, we searched PsycINFO, EMBASE, and MEDLINE from March 2020 to September 2022 to obtain original studies that investigated the accuracy of depression screening tools during the pandemic. We then searched these databases to identify meta-analyses summarizing the accuracy of these tools conducted before the pandemic and compared the optimal cut-offs for depression screening tools during the pandemic with those before. RESULT: Four original studies evaluating the optimal cut-offs for four screening tools (Beck Depression Inventory [BDI-II], Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale-Depression [HADS-D], Patient Health Questionnaire-9 [PHQ-9], and Geriatric Depression Scale-4 [GDS-4]) were published during the pandemic. Four meta-analyses summarizing these tools before the pandemic. We found that the optimal cut-off of BDI-II was 14 during the pandemic (23.8% depression prevalence, screening patients with Type 2 diabetes) and 14.5 before the pandemic (17.6% depression prevalence, screening psychiatric, primary care, and healthy populations); HADS-D was 10 during the pandemic (23.8% depression prevalence, screening patients with type 2 diabetes) and 7 before the pandemic (15.0% depression prevalence, screening medically ill patients); PHQ-9 was 11 during the pandemic (14.5% depression prevalence, screening university students) and 8 before the pandemic (10.9% depression prevalence, screening the unrestricted population), and GDS-4 was 1.8 during the pandemic (29.0% depression prevalence, screening adults seen in a memory clinic setting) and 3 before the pandemic (18.5% depression prevalence, screening older adults). CONCLUSION: The optimal cut-off for different screening tools may be sensitive to changes in study populations and reference standards. And potential spectrum effects that should be considered in post-COVID time which aiming to improve diagnostic accuracy.

Efficacy of interventions to reduce long term opioid treatment for chronic non-cancer pain: systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To review interventions to reduce long term opioid treatment in people with chronic non-cancer pain, considering efficacy on dose reduction and discontinuation, pain, function, quality of life, withdrawal symptoms, substance use, and adverse events. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies of interventions. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library searched from inception to July 2021. Reference lists and previous reviews were also searched and experts were contacted. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR STUDY SELECTION: Original research in English. Case reports and cross sectional studies were excluded. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two authors independently selected studies, extracted data, and used the Cochrane risk-of-bias tools for randomised and non-randomised studies (RoB 2 and ROBINS-I). Authors grouped interventions into five categories (pain self-management, complementary and alternative medicine, pharmacological and biomedical devices and interventions, opioid replacement treatment, and deprescription methods), estimated pooled effects using random effects meta-analytical models, and appraised the certainty of evidence using GRADE (grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation). RESULTS: Of 166 studies meeting inclusion criteria, 130 (78%) were considered at critical risk of bias and were excluded from the evidence synthesis. Of the 36 included studies, few had comparable treatment arms and sample sizes were generally small. Consequently, the certainty of the evidence was low or very low for more than 90% (41/44) of GRADE outcomes, including for all non-opioid patient outcomes. Despite these limitations, evidence of moderate certainty indicated that interventions to support prescribers' adherence to guidelines increased the likelihood of patients discontinuing opioid treatment (adjusted odds ratio 1.5, 95% confidence interval 1.0 to 2.1), and that these prescriber interventions as well as pain self-management programmes reduced opioid dose more than controls (intervention v control, mean difference -6.8 mg (standard error 1.6) daily oral morphine equivalent, P<0.001; pain programme v control, -14.31 mg daily oral morphine equivalent, 95% confidence interval -21.57 to -7.05). CONCLUSIONS: Evidence on the reduction of long term opioid treatment for chronic pain continues to be constrained by poor study methodology. Of particular concern is the lack of evidence relating to possible harms. Agreed standards for designing and reporting studies on the reduction of opioid treatment are urgently needed. REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020140943.

The contribution of patients' presurgery perceptions of surgeon attributes to the experience of trust and pain during third molar surgery.

BACKGROUND: Patients' feeling of trust in their surgeon may modulate the experience of pain during surgery. However, factors that contribute to patients' experience of trust during surgery remain underexamined. The current study examined the contribution of patients' impressions of surgeons' warmth and competence to their experience of trust and pain during wisdom tooth extractions. METHODS: Patients (N = 135, 47% female) scheduled for a wisdom tooth extraction reported their current distress and impressions of their surgeon's warmth and competence after a brief introduction to their surgeon immediately before surgery. Immediately after their surgery, patients reported their experience of trust (feeling safe and in good hands) and pain during surgery. Path analyses modeled perceptions of surgeon warmth, competence, and their interaction as predictors of patients' experiences of trust and pain during surgery. RESULTS: Higher perceived surgeon competence, but not warmth, predicted the experience of higher trust and lower pain during surgery. Perceived competence interacted with perceived warmth such that the competence-trust relationship was only significant at moderate to high levels of perceived surgeon warmth and failed to reach significance at lower levels of perceived surgeon warmth. CONCLUSION: These results indicate that patients feel greater trust in surgeons who are perceived as higher in competence and warmth, underscoring the importance of impression management in surgical care.

Can orthognathic surgery be expected to improve patients' psychological well-being? The challenge of hedonic adaptation.

In addition to improved oral health and function, many people are motivated to undergo orthognathic surgery to improve their facial aesthetics and overall psychological well-being (daily affect and satisfaction with life). This article explains the phenomenon of hedonic adaptation, which challenges the notion that patients treated with orthognathic surgery can expect to experience improvements in psychological well-being following surgery. We review evidence for hedonic adaptation across a variety of life circumstances and explain the psychological processes which account for the relative stability of people's well-being over their life course despite significant positive (and negative) changes in their circumstances. We examine the conditions that assist and inhibit hedonic adaptation to positive life events, and argue that if patients are made aware of these processes, they are more likely to achieve sustained improvements in psychological well-being following orthognathic surgery. Based on our narrative review of evidence for hedonic adaptation, we conclude that orthognathic surgery should not be expected to improve patients' psychological well-being in the long term and suggest that patients be advised to take intentional steps to preserve any improvements in their day-to-day affect and satisfaction with life that arise as a result of their surgery.

Interpersonal behavior in anticipation of pain: a naturalistic study of behavioral mimicry prior to surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Social relationships facilitate coping with pain, but research suggests that it may be difficult to galvanize social support during an episode of acute pain. OBJECTIVES: The current research examined whether social connections are optimized in the anticipation of pain by observing patients' mimicry of an interaction partner prior to surgery. We hypothesized that when controlling for their current experience of pain, patients' anticipation of pain would be associated with greater mimicry of an interaction partner. METHODS: Sixty-five patients were interviewed in the waiting room of a maxillofacial surgery unit prior to the removal of an impacted wisdom tooth. Patients' spontaneous mimicry of an interviewer was observed. Patients then rated the quality and intensity of their anticipated pain, as well as the intensity of their current pain and their affective distress. RESULTS: Anticipated pain, current pain, and affective distress were positively correlated. Current pain was associated with less frequent mimicry of an interaction partner. The zero-order correlation between anticipated pain and mimicry did not reach conventional levels of significance; however, when controlling for current pain, anticipated pain predicted more frequent mimicry of an interaction partner. The relationship between anticipated pain and mimicry was not explained by affective distress. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to demonstrate that anticipated and current pain relate to behavioral mimicry in divergent ways. Further research is needed to investigate whether the current pattern of results generalizes to other interpersonal behaviors that facilitate social bonds.

Effect of vasoconstriction on pain after mandibular third molar surgery: A single-blind, randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: Previous research has demonstrated the efficacy of using local compression to reduce postoperative pain after third molar surgery. It has been theorized that compression reduces pain intensity through vasoconstriction. The current research tests the veracity of this vasoconstriction hypothesis by testing the impact of local epinephrine (a local vasoconstrictor) versus a control on patients' pain ratings over 7 days following surgery. METHOD AND MATERIALS: Fifty patients scheduled for mandibular third molar surgery were randomly assigned to receive one cartridge of Ultracaine DS Forte (the treatment group) or one cartridge of Ultracaine DS (the control group) after surgical removal of the third molar. Participants used the visual analog scale (VAS) to provide daily ratings of pain intensity for 7 days following surgery. In addition, on day 7, the perceived effectiveness of the pain treatment was measured with the global perceived effect (GPE) scale. A quality- of-life questionnaire was also completed. RESULTS: A repeated-measures ANOVA indicated that the treatment group perceived significantly less pain than the control group on days 2 to 7 following surgery. In addition, 77.8% of the treatment group perceived their pain treatment to be successful, while only 69.6% of the control group reported that their pain was reduced successfully by day 7. CONCLUSION: The results of this study provide an initial proof of concept that epinephrine may have an analgesic effect on the period following third molar surgery. Further research with larger sample sizes is needed to strengthen evidence for the clinical utility of offering localized epinephrine to patients following third molar surgery.

Porous polyethylene implants in facial reconstruction: Outcome and complications.

The aim of the present study was to assess the indications, results and complications of patients treated with porous polyethylene (Medpor(®)) implants in the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery of VU Medical Centre, Amsterdam over 17 years. A total of 69 high-density porous polyethylene implants (Medpor(®) Biomaterial; Porex Surgical, Newman, GA) were used in forty patients (22 males, 18 females). All patients were analysed for gender, age, diagnosis, indications for surgery, follow-up period and postoperative complications. A mean age of 34.1 years was observed. The main reason for implant surgery was post-traumatic functional impairment (27.5%). Most implants were placed at the mandibular angel and the orbital floor. Unsatisfactory appearance scored the highest in postoperative complications (10.1%) followed by infection rate (7.2%). Comparing the number of implants placed over the years and the incidence of complications, makes the overall complications rate of porous polyethylene very low. A consensus about antibiotic prophylaxis is needed. The objective measurements in patient satisfaction and proper implant design would be of great use.

Protocols for treating the postoperative pain of fractures in Dutch hospitals.

INTRODUCTION: Every year, over 260,000 patients in the Netherlands are diagnosed with a traumatic fracture. Many patients are treated surgically and need postoperative treatment of pain. Research suggests postoperative pain is often under-treated, leaving a significant proportion of patients in moderate to severe postoperative pain. Specialized, evidence-based pain-management protocols offer patients the best possible pain management, and significantly reduce the risk of pain-related health complications. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to review the range of postoperative pain protocols that are currently being used to treat postoperative fracture pain within the Netherlands, and investigate whether a specialized, evidence-based protocol for treating postoperative fracture pain exists within this sample. METHODS: A written request for the protocol currently being used for the treatment of postoperative pain following the surgical treatment of a fracture was sent to 101 Dutch hospital departments. The administration and dosage of pain medications used during postoperative pain management were then identified and summarized. RESULTS: Of the contacted hospitals, 57% sent in protocols; 45% of these were eligible for analysis. All of the departments sent a general or acute pain protocol rather than a specialized protocol for the treatment of postoperative pain associated with the surgical treatment of fractures. A total of 22 different analgesics were used for pain management in 135 different administration schemes. Paracetamol, diclofenac, and morphine were used in the majority of protocols. Medication was given via oral, rectal, intravenous, subcutaneous, intramuscular, and epidural routes, amongst others. CONCLUSION: No specialized, evidence-based protocols for the treatment of postoperative fracture pain were found in this Dutch sample. A wide variety of medications, dosages, and administration schemes were used to manage postoperative pain following the surgical treatment of a fracture. The importance of developing a clear, specialized, evidence-based protocol for the treatment of postoperative pain following fracture surgery is discussed.