Patterns and outcome of unplanned care in lung cancer patients: an observational study in a medical oncology department.

Background: There is increasing interest in unplanned care utilization among lung cancer patients and its evaluation should allow the identification of areas for quality improvement. Being a major priority for transformation in oncology, we aim to measure the risk and burden of unplanned care in a medical oncology department and identify factors that determine acute care. Methods: This was an observational retrospective cohort study that included all lung cancer patients treated at Puerta de Hierro-Majadahonda University Hospital between January 1st 2016 and December 31st 2020. Data cut off: June 30th, 2021. The main objective was to assess the incidence of unplanned care, emergency department (ED) visits and unplanned hospital admissions, from the first visit to the medical oncology service and its potential conditioning variables, considering patient death as a competitive event. As secondary objectives, a description and a quality of unplanned care evaluation was carried out. Results: A total of 821 lung cancer patients, all histologies and stages, were included (median follow-up: 32.8 months). Six hundred and eighty-one patients required consultation in the ED (82.9%), and 558 required an unplanned admission (68%). Eighty-six percent of ED consultations and 80.9% of unplanned hospital admissions were related to cancer or its treatment. The 1-year cumulative incidence for ED consultation and for unplanned hospital admission was 71.3% (95% CI: 67.8-74.5%) and 56.7% (95% CI: 53-60%), respectively. In the multivariable analysis, a higher tumor stage increased the risk of consultation in the ED, while a higher stage, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) 2 compared to ECOG PS 0, male sex, opioid or steroid use at first consultation increased the risk of unplanned admission. Conclusions: Our study shows that lung cancer patients have an extremely high demand for unplanned care. It is an early need and related to cancer in the majority of consultations and admissions and therefore a key issue for the management of oncology departments. We must optimize the follow-up of patients with a higher risk of unplanned care, advanced lung cancer or symptomatic patients, incorporating remote monitoring strategies and early interventions, as developing specific urgent care pathways for a better comprehensive cancer care.

Buprenorphine versus dexamethasone as perineural adjuvants in femoral and adductor canal nerve blocks for total knee arthroplasty: a randomized, non-inferiority clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Optimal control of acute postoperative pain and prevention of chronic persistent pain in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remain a challenge. METHODS: A randomized, non-inferiority clinical trial (385 patients) evaluated every hour immediate postoperative pain during 24 h, using a verbal rating 11-point scale for patient self-reporting of pain (VRS11). All patients received subarachnoid anesthesia and were randomly allocated in four groups: single shots femoral (FNB) or adductor canal blocks (ACB), both with dexamethasone (dex) and buprenorphine (bup). Patients received intravenous analgesia (metamizole magnesium, dexketoprofen) and rescue analgesia when needed: intravenous (paracetamol and morphine) and/or regional (femoral and sciatic nerve blocks). Demographics and adverse effects were also recorded. RESULTS: A 45.7% of patients had pain: bupACB 56.3%, bupFNB 50.0%, dexACB 40.6% and dexFNB 36.1% (P=0.022). Rescue analgesia was needed in 37.7% of patients (P=0.128). There were statistical differences in percentage of timepoints without pain (95.0±7.9%, P=0.014) and mean VRS11 (0.18±0.3, P=0.012) but no differences in distribution of intensity periods of pain. There were no significant differences in the need of rescue analgesia excepting the use of intravenous morphine (P=0.025). CONCLUSIONS: Buprenorphine is in the present trial inferior to dexamethasone by less than the established non-inferiority limit when used as perineural adjuvant in femoral nerve or adductor canal blocks in total knee arthroplasty analgesia. So, it could be considered an alternative in patients where dexamethasone is contraindicated, such as diabetics.

Physician-Related Variability in the Outcomes of an Invasive Treatment for Neck and Back Pain: A Multi-Level Analysis of Data Gathered in Routine Clinical Practice.

Neuro-reflexotherapy (NRT) is a proven effective, invasive treatment for neck and back pain. To assess physician-related variability in results, data from post-implementation surveillance of 9023 patients treated within the Spanish National Health Service by 12 physicians were analyzed. Separate multi-level logistic regression models were developed for spinal pain (SP), referred pain (RP), and disability. The models included all patient-related variables predicting response to NRT and physician-related variables. The Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) and the Median Odds Ratio (MOR) were calculated. Adjusted MOR (95% CI) was 1.70 (1.47; 2.09) for SP, 1.60 (1.38; 1.99) for RP, and 1.65 (1.42; 2.03) for disability. Adjusted ICC (95%CI) values were 0.08 (0.05; 0.15) for SP, 0.07 (0.03; 0.14) for RP, and 0.08 (0.04; 0.14) for disability. In the sensitivity analysis, in which the 6920 patients treated during the physicians' training period were excluded, adjusted MOR was 1.38 (1.17; 1.98) for SP, 1.37 (1.12; 2.31) for RP, and 1.25 (1.09; 1.79) for disability, while ICCs were 0.03 (0.01; 0.14) for SP, 0.03 (0.00; 0.19) for RP, and 0.02 (0.00; 0.10) for disability. In conclusion, the variability in results obtained by different NRT-certified specialists is reasonable. This suggests that current training standards are appropriate.

Multicenter study of ceftolozane/tazobactam for treatment of Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections in critically ill patients.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to assess the efficacy of ceftolozane-tazobactam (C/T) for treating infections due to Pseudomonas aeruginosa (P. aeruginosa) in critically ill patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A multicenter, retrospective and observational study was conducted in critically ill patients receiving different C/T dosages and antibiotic combinations for P. aeruginosa infections. Demographic data, localisation and severity of infection, clinical and microbiological outcome, and mortality were evaluated. RESULTS: Ninety-five patients received C/T for P. aeruginosa serious infections. The main infections were nosocomial pneumonia (56.2%), intra-abdominal infection (10.5%), tracheobronchitis (8.4%), and urinary tract infection (6.3%). Most infections were complicated with sepsis (49.5%) or septic shock (45.3%), and bacteraemia (10.5%). Forty-six episodes were treated with high-dose C/T (3 g every 8 hours) and 38 episodes were treated with standard dosage (1.5 g every 8 hours). Almost half (44.2%) of the patients were treated with C/T monotherapy, and the remaining group received combination therapy with other antibiotics. Sixty-eight (71.6%) patients presented a favourable clinical response. Microbiological eradication was documented in 42.1% (40/95) of the episodes. The global ICU mortality was 36.5%. Univariate analysis showed that 30-day mortality was significantly associated (P < 0.05) with Charlson Index at ICU admission and the need of life-supporting therapies. CONCLUSIONS: C/T appeared to be an effective therapy for severe infections due to P. aeruginosa in critically ill patients. Mortality was mainly related to the severity of the infection. No benefit was observed with high-dose C/T or combination therapy with other antibiotics.

Predicting the evolution of neck pain episodes in routine clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to develop models for predicting the evolution of a neck pain (NP) episode. METHODS: Three thousand two hundred twenty-five acute and chronic patients seeking care for NP, were recruited consecutively in 47 health care centers. Data on 37 variables were gathered, including gender, age, employment status, duration of pain, intensity of NP and pain referred down to the arm (AP), disability, history of neck surgery, diagnostic procedures undertaken, imaging findings, clinical diagnosis, and treatments used. Three separate multivariable logistic regression models were developed for predicting a clinically relevant improvement in NP, AP and disability at 3 months. RESULTS: Three thousand one (93.5%%) patients attended follow-up. For all the models calibration was good. The area under the ROC curve was ≥0.717 for pain and 0.664 for disability. Factors associated with a better prognosis were: a) For all the outcomes: pain being acute (vs. chronic) and having received neuro-reflexotherapy. b) For NP: nonspecific pain (vs. pain caused by disc herniation or spinal stenosis), no signs of disc degeneration on imaging, staying at work, and being female. c) For AP: nonspecific NP and no signs of disc degeneration on imaging. d) For disability: staying at work and no signs of facet joint degeneration on imaging. CONCLUSIONS: A prospective registry can be used for developing valid predictive models to quantify the odds that a given patient with NP will experience a clinically relevant improvement.

Interventions for Old World cutaneous leishmaniasis.

BACKGROUND: Cutaneous leishmaniasis, caused by a parasitic infection, is considered one of the most serious skin diseases in many low- and middle-income countries. Old World cutaneous leishmaniasis (OWCL) is caused by species found in Africa, Asia, the Middle East, the Mediterranean, and India. The most commonly prescribed treatments are antimonials, but other drugs have been used with varying success. As OWCL tends to heal spontaneously, it is necessary to justify the use of systemic and topical treatments. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2008. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of therapeutic interventions for the localised form of Old World cutaneous leishmaniasis. SEARCH METHODS: We updated our searches of the following databases to November 2016: the Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and LILACS. We also searched five trials registers and checked the reference lists of included studies for further references to relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We wrote to national programme managers, general co-ordinators, directors, clinicians, WHO-EMRO regional officers of endemic countries, pharmaceutical companies, tropical medicine centres, and authors of relevant papers for further information about relevant unpublished and ongoing trials. We undertook a separate search for adverse effects of interventions for Old World cutaneous leishmaniasis in September 2015 using MEDLINE. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of either single or combination treatments in immunocompetent people with OWCL confirmed by smear, histology, culture, or polymerase chain reaction. The comparators were either no treatment, placebo/vehicle, and/or another active compound. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias and extracted data. We only synthesised data when we were able to identify at least two studies investigating similar treatments and reporting data amenable to pooling. We also recorded data about adverse effects from the corresponding search. MAIN RESULTS: We included 89 studies (of which 40 were new to this update) in 10,583 people with OWCL. The studies included were conducted mainly in the Far or Middle East at regional hospitals, local healthcare clinics, and skin disease research centres. Women accounted for 41.5% of the participants (range: 23% to 80%). The overall mean age of participants was 25 years (range 12 to 56). Most studies lasted between two to six months, with the longest lasting two years; average duration was four months. Most studies were at unclear or high risk for most bias domains. A lack of blinding and reporting bias were present in almost 40% of studies. Two trials were at low risk of bias for all domains. Trials reported the causative species poorly.Here we provide results for the two main comparisons identified: itraconazole (200 mg for six to eight weeks) versus placebo; and paromomycin ointment (15% plus 10% urea, twice daily for 14 days) versus vehicle.In the comparison of oral itraconazole versus placebo, at 2.5 months' follow up, 85/125 participants in the itraconazole group achieved complete cure compared to 54/119 in the placebo group (RR 3.70, 95% CI 0.35 to 38.99; 3 studies; 244 participants). In one study, microbiological or histopathological cure of skin lesions only occurred in the itraconazole group after a mean follow-up of 2.5 months (RR 17.00, 95% CI 0.47 to 612.21; 20 participants). However, although the analyses favour oral itraconazole for these outcomes, we cannot be confident in the results due to the very low certainty evidence. More side effects of mild abdominal pain and nausea (RR 2.36, 95% CI 0.74 to 7.47; 3 studies; 204 participants) and mild abnormal liver function (RR 3.08, 95% CI 0.53 to 17.98; 3 studies; 84 participants) occurred in the itraconazole group (as well as reports of headaches and dizziness), compared with the placebo group, but again we rated the certainty of evidence as very low so are unsure of the results.When comparing paromomycin with vehicle, there was no difference in the number of participants who achieved complete cure (RR of 1.00, 95% CI 0.86, 1.17; 383 participants, 2 studies) and microbiological or histopathological cure of skin lesions after a mean follow-up of 2.5 months (RR 1.03, CI 0.88 to 1.20; 383 participants, 2 studies), but the paromomycin group had more skin/local reactions (such as inflammation, vesiculation, pain, redness, or itch) (RR 1.42, 95% CI 0.67 to 3.01; 4 studies; 713 participants). For all of these outcomes, the certainty of evidence was very low, meaning we are unsure about these results.Trial authors did not report the percentage of lesions cured after the end of treatment or speed of healing for either of these key comparisons. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There was very low-certainty evidence to support the effectiveness of itraconazole and paromomycin ointment for OWCL in terms of cure (i.e. microbiological or histopathological cure and percentage of participants completely cured). Both of these interventions incited more adverse effects, which were mild in nature, than their comparisons, but we could draw no conclusions regarding safety due to the very low certainty of the evidence for this outcome.We downgraded the key outcomes in these two comparisons due to high risk of bias, inconsistency between the results, and imprecision. There is a need for large, well-designed international studies that evaluate long-term effects of current therapies and enable a reliable conclusion about treatments. Future trials should specify the species of leishmaniasis; trials on types caused by Leishmania infantum, L aethiopica, andL donovani are lacking. Research into the effects of treating women of childbearing age, children, people with comorbid conditions, and those who are immunocompromised would also be helpful.It was difficult to evaluate the overall efficacy of any of the numerous treatments due to the variable treatment regimens examined and because RCTs evaluated different Leishmania species and took place in different geographical areas. Some outcomes we looked for but did not find were degree of functional and aesthetic impairment, change in ability to detect Leishmania, quality of life, and emergence of resistance. There were only limited data on prevention of scarring.

Interventions for Old World cutaneous leishmaniasis.

BACKGROUND: Cutaneous leishmaniasis, caused by a parasitic infection, is considered one of the most serious skin diseases in many low- and middle-income countries. Old World cutaneous leishmaniasis (OWCL) is caused by species found in Africa, Asia, the Middle East, the Mediterranean, and India. The most commonly prescribed treatments are antimonials, but other drugs have been used with varying success. As OWCL tends to heal spontaneously, it is necessary to justify the use of systemic and topical treatments. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2008. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of therapeutic interventions for the localised form of Old World cutaneous leishmaniasis. SEARCH METHODS: We updated our searches of the following databases to November 2016: the Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and LILACS. We also searched five trials registers and checked the reference lists of included studies for further references to relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We wrote to national programme managers, general co-ordinators, directors, clinicians, WHO-EMRO regional officers of endemic countries, pharmaceutical companies, tropical medicine centres, and authors of relevant papers for further information about relevant unpublished and ongoing trials. We undertook a separate search for adverse effects of interventions for Old World cutaneous leishmaniasis in September 2015 using MEDLINE. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of either single or combination treatments in immunocompetent people with OWCL confirmed by smear, histology, culture, or polymerase chain reaction. The comparators were either no treatment, placebo/vehicle, and/or another active compound. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias and extracted data. We only synthesised data when we were able to identify at least two studies investigating similar treatments and reporting data amenable to pooling. We also recorded data about adverse effects from the corresponding search. MAIN RESULTS: We included 89 studies (of which 40 were new to this update) in 10,583 people with OWCL. The studies included were conducted mainly in the Far or Middle East at regional hospitals, local healthcare clinics, and skin disease research centres. Women accounted for 41.5% of the participants (range: 23% to 80%). The overall mean age of participants was 25 years (range 12 to 56). Most studies lasted between two to six months, with the longest lasting two years; average duration was four months. Most studies were at unclear or high risk for most bias domains. A lack of blinding and reporting bias were present in almost 40% of studies. Two trials were at low risk of bias for all domains. Trials reported the causative species poorly.Here we provide results for the two main comparisons identified: itraconazole (200 mg for six to eight weeks) versus placebo; and paromomycin ointment (15% plus 10% urea, twice daily for 14 days) versus vehicle.In the comparison of oral itraconazole versus placebo, at 2.5 months' follow up, 85/125 participants in the itraconazole group achieved complete cure compared to 54/119 in the placebo group (RR 3.70, 95% CI 0.35 to 38.99; 3 studies; 244 participants). In one study, microbiological or histopathological cure of skin lesions only occurred in the itraconazole group after a mean follow-up of 2.5 months (RR 17.00, 95% CI 0.47 to 612.21; 20 participants). However, although the analyses favour oral itraconazole for these outcomes, we cannot be confident in the results due to the very low certainty evidence. More side effects of mild abdominal pain and nausea (RR 2.36, 95% CI 0.74 to 7.47; 3 studies; 204 participants) and mild abnormal liver function (RR 3.08, 95% CI 0.53 to 17.98; 3 studies; 84 participants) occurred in the itraconazole group (as well as reports of headaches and dizziness), compared with the placebo group, but again we rated the certainty of evidence as very low so are unsure of the results.When comparing paromomycin with vehicle, there was no difference in the number of participants who achieved complete cure (RR of 1.00, 95% CI 0.86, 1.17; 383 participants, 2 studies) and microbiological or histopathological cure of skin lesions after a mean follow-up of 2.5 months (RR 1.03, CI 0.88 to 1.20; 383 participants, 2 studies), but the paromomycin group had more skin/local reactions (such as inflammation, vesiculation, pain, redness, or itch) (RR 1.42, 95% CI 0.67 to 3.01; 4 studies; 713 participants). For all of these outcomes, the certainty of evidence was very low, meaning we are unsure about these results.Trial authors did not report the percentage of lesions cured after the end of treatment or speed of healing for either of these key comparisons. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There was very low-certainty evidence to support the effectiveness of itraconazole and paromomycin ointment for OWCL in terms of cure (i.e. microbiological or histopathological cure and percentage of participants completely cured). Both of these interventions incited more adverse effects, which were mild in nature, than their comparisons, but we could draw no conclusions regarding safety due to the very low certainty of the evidence for this outcome.We downgraded the key outcomes in these two comparisons due to high risk of bias, inconsistency between the results, and imprecision. There is a need for large, well-designed international studies that evaluate long-term effects of current therapies and enable a reliable conclusion about treatments. Future trials should specify the species of leishmaniasis; trials on types caused by Leishmania infantum, L aethiopica, andL donovani are lacking. Research into the effects of treating women of childbearing age, children, people with comorbid conditions, and those who are immunocompromised would also be helpful.It was difficult to evaluate the overall efficacy of any of the numerous treatments due to the variable treatment regimens examined and because RCTs evaluated different Leishmania species and took place in different geographical areas. Some outcomes we looked for but did not find were degree of functional and aesthetic impairment, change in ability to detect Leishmania, quality of life, and emergence of resistance. There were only limited data on prevention of scarring.

Predicting outcomes of neuroreflexotherapy in patients with subacute or chronic neck or low back pain.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: In the context of shared decision-making, a valid estimation of the probability that a given patient will improve after a specific treatment is valuable. PURPOSE: To develop models that predict the improvement of spinal pain, referred pain, and disability in patients with subacute or chronic neck or low back pain undergoing a conservative treatment. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Analysis of data from a prospective registry in routine practice. PATIENT SAMPLE: All patients who had been discharged after receiving a conservative treatment within the Spanish National Health Service (SNHS) (n=8,778). OUTCOME MEASURES: Spinal pain, referred pain, and disability were assessed before the conservative treatment and at discharge by the use of previously validated methods. METHODS: Improvement in spinal pain, referred pain, and disability was defined as a reduction in score greater than the minimal clinically important change. A predictive model that included demographic, clinical, and work-related variables was developed for each outcome using multivariate logistic regression. Missing data were addressed using multiple imputation. Discrimination and calibration were assessed for each model. The models were validated by bootstrap, and nomograms were developed. RESULTS: The following variables showed a predictive value in the three models: baseline scores for pain and disability, pain duration, having undergone X-ray, having undergone spine surgery, and receiving financial assistance for neck or low back pain. Discrimination of the three models ranged from slight to moderate, and calibration was good. CONCLUSIONS: A registry in routine practice can be used to develop models that estimate the probability of improvement for each individual patient undergoing a specific form of treatment. Generalizing this approach to other treatments can be valuable for shared decision making.

The prognostic value of catastrophizing for predicting the clinical evolution of low back pain patients: a study in routine clinical practice within the Spanish National Health Service.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Experimental studies suggest that catastrophizing may worsen the prognosis of low back pain (LBP) and LBP-related disability and increase the risk of chronicity. PURPOSE: To assess the prognostic value of baseline catastrophizing for predicting the clinical evolution of LBP patients in routine clinical practice and the association between the evolution of pain and catastrophizing. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Prospective study in routine clinical practice of the Spanish National Health Service. PATIENT SAMPLE: One thousand four hundred twenty-two acute and chronic adult LBP patients treated in primary and hospital care. OUTCOME MEASURES: Pain, disability, and catastrophizing measured through validated instruments. METHODS: Patients were managed according to routine clinical practice. Outcome measures were assessed at baseline and 3 months later. Logistic regression models were developed to estimate the association between baseline catastrophizing score and the improvement of LBP and disability, adjusting for baseline LBP and leg pain (LP) severity, disability, duration of the pain episode, workers' compensation coverage, radiological findings, failed back surgery, and diagnostic procedures and treatments undertaken throughout the study. Another model was developed to estimate the association between the evolution of LBP and the change in catastrophizing, adjusting for the same possible confounders plus the evolution of LP and disability. Models were repeated excluding the treatments undergone after the baseline assessment. RESULTS: Regression models showed that the degree of baseline catastrophizing does not predict the evolution of LBP and disability. Conversely, as the degree of pain improvement increases, so does the odds ratio for improvement in catastrophizing, ranging from three (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 2.00-4.50; p<.001) for improvements in pain between 1.1 and 4 visual analog scale (VAS) points, to 7.3 (95% CI, 3.49-15.36; p<.001) for improvements in pain more than 6.1 VAS points. Similar results were obtained when treatments were excluded from the models. CONCLUSIONS: In routine practice, assessing the baseline score for catastrophizing does not help clinicians to predict the evolution of LBP and disability at 3 months.

The correlation between pain, catastrophizing, and disability in subacute and chronic low back pain: a study in the routine clinical practice of the Spanish National Health Service.

STUDY DESIGN: Correlation between variables measured with previously validated instruments. OBJECTIVE: To explore the association between catastrophizing and disability in patients treated for subacute or chronic low back pain (LBP) within routine clinical practice in Spain. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The influence of psychological variables on LBP-related disability in Southern Europe is different to the one in the Anglo-Saxon and Northern European cultural environments. In Spanish LBP patients, the influence of fear avoidance beliefs on disability is negligible, and catastrophizing does not mediate the improvement of disability caused by active education. The association between catastrophizing and dis-ability is unknown. METHODS: Thirty-three clinicians working for the Spanish National Health Service in 6 primary care and 8 specialty centers, recruited 1461 patients seeking care for subacute and chronic LBP. Patients were assessed only once. A linear regression model was developed to assess the percentage of the variance of disability explained by gender, age, chronicity status, severity of LBP, severity of referred pain (referred pain down to the leg), catastrophizing, eligible for workers' compensation (yes/no), failed back surgery (yes/no), radiologic findings, and treatments. RESULTS: Correlations among LBP, referred pain down to the leg, disability, and catastrophizing were moderate, but significant. The strongest one was between disability and catastrophizing (r ∇ 0.520). Catastrophizing explained 28% of disability, whereas severity of LBP only 3%. Global adjusted R of the model was 0.387. There was an association between some radiologic findings and treatments, and slightly higher levels of disability. CONCLUSION: In Southern European subacute and chronic LBP patients, catastrophizing correlates with dis-ability and explains approximately one-fourth of its variance. Further studies should assess its value as a prognostic factor in subacute and chronic patients.

Neuro-reflexotherapy for the management of myofascial temporomandibular joint pain: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial.

PURPOSE: To assess the efficacy of neuro-reflexotherapy intervention (NRT) for treating temporomandibular joint dysfunction attributed to myofascial pain. Neuro-reflexotherapy intervention consists of the temporary implantation of epidermal devices in trigger points in the back and ear. It has shown efficacy, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness in treating subacute and chronic common back pain. No study, however, has explored its efficacy in treating myofascial temporomandibular joint pain (MF/TMJP). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Patients with MF/TMJP for more than 3 months in spite of conservative treatment, and with no evidence of major structural damage in the joint, were recruited at the Maxillofacial Department of the Hospital Clínico Universitario, a teaching hospital in Madrid, Spain. Patients were randomly assigned to an intervention group and to a control group. Patients in the treated group underwent 2 NRTs, immediately after baseline assessment and 45 days later. Sham interventions in the control group consisted of placement of the same number of epidermal devices within a 5-cm radius of the target zones. In both groups, conservative treatment during follow-up was allowed and recorded. Patients underwent clinical evaluations on 4 occasions: 5 minutes before intervention, 5 minutes after intervention, and 45 and 90 days later. The preintervention assessment was performed by the physician at the hospital service who included the patient in the study. The 3 follow-up assessments were performed independently by 1 of 2 physicians who had no connection with the research team, and who were blinded to patients' assignments. The primary outcome variable was level of pain severity during jaw movements at the last assessment (90 days), and the key comparison of interest was change in pain over time (pain levels at baseline and at 90 days). Level of pain was measured using a visual analog scale (VAS). RESULTS: Fifty-one patients with MF/TMJP were recruited into the study. Random assignment allocated 27 patients to the intervention group, and 24 to the control group. Differences in pain severity in favor of the intervention group appeared immediately after the intervention, persisted for 45 days, and increased after the second intervention. Differences at last follow-up were highly clinically and statistically significant (4 to 5 points on the VAS, P = .000), allowing for patients in the intervention group to cease drug treatment (P = .005). There were no differences in the evolution of crepitus or clicking in the joint. There were no clinically relevant side effects associated with the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: For patients in whom conservative treatment has failed, NRT improves the chronic pain associated with MF/TMJP syndrome.