Nation-Wide Variation in Presence of Legislation or Protocols for EMS Care of Operational Canines.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Deployment of law enforcement operational canines (OpK9s) risks injuries to the animals. This study's aim was to assess the current status of states' OpK9 (veterinary Emergency Medical Services [VEMS]) laws and care protocols within the United States. METHODS: Cross-sectional standardized review of state laws/regulations and OpK9 VEMS treatment protocols was undertaken. For each state and for the District of Columbia (DC), the presence of OpK9 legislation and/or care protocols was ascertained. Information was obtained through governmental records and from stakeholders (eg, state EMS medical directors and state veterinary boards).The main endpoints were proportions of states with OpK9 laws and/or treatment protocols. Proportions are reported with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Fisher's exact test (P <.05) assessed whether presence of an OpK9 law in a given jurisdiction was associated with presence of an OpK9 care protocol, and whether there was geographic variation (based on United States Census Bureau regions) in presence of OpK9 laws or protocols. RESULTS: Of 51 jurisdictions, 20 (39.2%) had OpK9 legislation and 23 (45.1%) had state-wide protocols for EMS treatment of OpK9s. There was no association (P = .991) between presence of legislation and presence of protocols. There was no association (P = .144) between presence of legislation and region: Northeast 66.7% (95% CI, 29.9-92.5%), Midwest 50.0% (95% CI, 21.1-78.9%), South 29.4% (95% CI, 10.3-56.0%), and West 23.1% (95% CI, 5.0-53.8%). There was significant (P = .001) regional variation in presence of state-wide OpK9 treatment protocols: Northeast 100.0% (95% CI, 66.4-100.0%), Midwest 16.7% (95% CI, 2.1-48.4%), South 47.1% (95% CI, 23.0-72.2%), and West 30.8% (95% CI, 9.1-61.4%). CONCLUSION: There is substantial disparity with regard to presence of OpK9 legal and/or clinical guidance. National collaborative guidelines development is advisable to optimize and standardize care of OpK9s. Additional attention should be paid to educational and training programs to best utilize the limited available training budgets.

Accurate pain reporting training diminishes the placebo response: Results from a randomised, double-blind, crossover trial.

Analgesic trials frequently fail to demonstrate efficacy of drugs known to be efficacious. Poor pain reporting accuracy is a possible source for this low essay-sensitivity. We report the effects of Accurate-Pain-Reporting-Training (APRT) on the placebo response in a trial of Pregabalin for painful-diabetic-neuropathy. The study was a two-stage randomized, double-blind trial: In Stage-1 (Training) subjects were randomized to APRT or No-Training. The APRT participants received feedback on the accuracy of their pain reports in response to mechanical stimuli, measured by R-square score. In Stage-2 (Evaluation) all subjects entered a placebo-controlled, cross-over trial. Primary (24-h average pain intensity) and secondary (current, 24-h worst, and 24-h walking pain intensity) outcome measures were reported. Fifty-one participants completed the study. APRT patients (n = 28) demonstrated significant (p = 0.036) increases in R-square scores. The APRT group demonstrated significantly (p = 0.018) lower placebo response (0.29 ± 1.21 vs. 1.48 ± 2.21, mean difference ± SD = -1.19±1.73). No relationships were found between the R-square scores and changes in pain intensity in the treatment arm. In summary, our training successfully increased pain reporting accuracy and resulted in a diminished placebo response. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.