The Added Value of Intraoperative Hypnosis during Spinal Cord Stimulation Lead Implantation under Awake Anesthesia in Patients Presenting with Refractory Chronic Pain.

To improve pain relief for refractory pain condition, spinal cord stimulation (SCS) needs to target the dedicated neuronal fibers within the dorsal columns. Intraoperative feedback from the patient can optimize lead placement but requires "awake surgery", allowing interaction between patient and surgeon. This can produce negative effects like anxiety and stress. To better manage these aspects, we propose to combine intraoperative hypnosis with awake anesthesia. Seventy-four patients (35 females, 22-80 years) presenting with chronic refractory pain, were offered intraoperative hypnosis during awake SCS lead implantation. Interactive conversational hypnosis was used as well as interactive touch, which was enhanced during painful moments during the lead intraoperative programming. All patients participated actively during the intraoperative testing which helped to optimize the lead positioning. They kept an extremely positive memory of the surgery and of the hypnotic experience, despite some painful moments. Pain could be reduced in these patients by using interactions and touch, which works on Gate Control modulation. Positive memory was reinforced by congratulations to create self-confidence and to induce positive expectations, which could reinforce the Diffuse Noxious Inhibitory Controls at the spinal level. Cooperation was improved because the patient was actively participating and thus, much more alert when feedback was required. Combining intraoperative hypnosis with awake anesthesia appears helpful for SCS lead implantation. It enhances patient cooperation, allows optimization of lead positioning, and leads to better pain control, positive and resourceful memory.

OnabotulinumtoxinA injections in chronic migraine, targeted to sites of pericranial myofascial pain: an observational, open label, real-life cohort study.

BACKGROUND: OnabotulinumtoxinA has proven its efficacy in reducing the number of headache days in chronic migraine (CM) patients. The usual paradigm includes 31 pericranial injection sites with low dose (5 U) per site. The aim of this study is to present the results obtained using a simpler injection protocol of onabotulinumtoxinA, with injection sites targeted to pericranial myofascial sites of pain. METHODS: Observational, open label, real-life, cohort study. We enrolled 63 consecutive patients fulfilling the diagnostic criteria of CM, and refractory to conventional treatments. The patients were injected using a "follow-the-pain" pattern into the corrugator and/or temporalis and/or trapezius muscles. The doses per muscle were fixed. According to the number of muscles injected, the total dose could vary from 70 to 150 U per session. Patients were considered responders if they had a ≥ 50% decrease in number of headache days in at least two consecutive injection cycles. RESULTS: Forty one patients (65.1% in intention to treat analysis) responded to treatment. In 70.7% of responders, the effect size was even higher, with a reduction ≥70% in the number of headache days. The associated cervical pain and muscle tenderness, present in 33 patients, was reduced by ≥50% in 31 patients (94%). Triptan consumption dramatically decreased (81%) in responders. The trapezius was the most frequently injected muscle. We observed no serious adverse event. The mean patient satisfaction rate was 8.5/10. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides additional robust evidence supporting the efficacy of onabotulinumtoxinA injections in CM. Furthermore, the paradigm we used, with reduced number of injection sites targeted to pericranial myofascial sites of pain, may provide evidence in favor of the implication of myofascial trigger points in migraine chronicization. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Protocol Record I17022 ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03175263 . Date of registration: June 7, 2017. Retrospectively registered.

eDOL mHealth App and Web Platform for Self-monitoring and Medical Follow-up of Patients With Chronic Pain: Observational Feasibility Study.

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain affects approximately 30% of the general population, severely degrades quality of life (especially in older adults) and professional life (inability or reduction in the ability to work and loss of employment), and leads to billions in additional health care costs. Moreover, available painkillers are old, with limited efficacy and can cause significant adverse effects. Thus, there is a need for innovation in the management of chronic pain. Better characterization of patients could help to identify the predictors of successful treatments, and thus, guide physicians in the initial choice of treatment and in the follow-up of their patients. Nevertheless, current assessments of patients with chronic pain provide only fragmentary data on painful daily experiences. Real-life monitoring of subjective and objective markers of chronic pain using mobile health (mHealth) programs can address this issue. OBJECTIVE: We hypothesized that regular patient self-monitoring using an mHealth app would lead physicians to obtain deeper understanding and new insight into patients with chronic pain and that, for patients, regular self-monitoring using an mHealth app would play a positive therapeutic role and improve adherence to treatment. We aimed to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of a new mHealth app called eDOL. METHODS: We conducted an observational study to assess the feasibility and acceptability of the eDOL tool. Patients completed several questionnaires using the tool over a period of 2 weeks and repeated assessments weekly over a period of 3 months. Physicians saw their patients at a follow-up visit that took place at least 3 months after the inclusion visit. A composite criterion of the acceptability and feasibility of the eDOL tool was calculated after the completion of study using satisfaction surveys from both patients and physicians. RESULTS: Data from 105 patients (of 133 who were included) were analyzed. The rate of adherence was 61.9% (65/105) after 3 months. The median acceptability score was 7 (out of 10) for both patients and physicians. There was a high rate of completion of the baseline questionnaires and assessments (mean 89.3%), and a low rate of completion of the follow-up questionnaires and assessments (63.8% (67/105) and 61.9% (65/105) respectively). We were also able to characterize subgroups of patients and determine a profile of those who adhered to eDOL. We obtained 4 clusters that differ from each other in their biopsychosocial characteristics. Cluster 4 corresponds to patients with more disabling chronic pain (daily impact and comorbidities) and vice versa for cluster 1. CONCLUSIONS: This work demonstrates that eDOL is highly feasible and acceptable for both patients with chronic pain and their physicians. It also shows that such a tool can integrate many parameters to ensure the detailed characterization of patients for future research works and pain management. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrial.gov NCT03931694; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03931694.