The prevalence of neuropathic pain: clinical evaluation compared with screening tools in a community population.

BACKGROUND: Neuropathic pain is reported to be common based on studies from specialty centers and survey studies. However, few prevalence estimates have been completed in a community population using clinical evaluation. OBJECTIVE: To develop an estimate of the prevalence of neuropathic pain in community-dwelling adults. METHODS: Data from a mailed survey (N = 3,575 community respondents), telephone interview (N = 907), and a clinical examination (N = 205) were linked to estimate the population prevalence of neuropathic pain. Using the clinical examination as the "gold" standard, estimates from several screening tools were developed and adjusted to the Olmsted County, MN adult population. RESULTS: The estimated community prevalence of neuropathic pain from the clinical examination (gold standard) was 9.8%. Most other estimates were lower, including a 3.0% population prevalence using the Berger criteria and 8.8% using the Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs. Only the prevalence rate based on self-report of nerve pain was higher (12.4%). Overlap among the groups each tool identified as having "neuropathic predominant pain" was only modest and the groups had significantly different rates of depressive symptoms, anxiety, limited functional ability, and use of complementary and alternative medicine. CONCLUSIONS: The estimated rates and personal characteristics of community residents with "neuropathic pain" vary widely depending on the tools used to identify neuropathic pain. None of the screening tools compared well with clinical evaluation. The differences in the groups identified by alternative screening methods become of major importance when reporting neuropathic pain epidemiology, studying therapies for neuropathic pain, or attempting to translate neuropathic pain research into clinical practice.

DHEA in elderly women and DHEA or testosterone in elderly men.

BACKGROUND: Dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) and testosterone are widely promoted as antiaging supplements, but the long-term benefits, as compared with potential harm, are unknown. METHODS: We performed a 2-year, placebo-controlled, randomized, double-blind study involving 87 elderly men with low levels of the sulfated form of DHEA and bioavailable testosterone and 57 elderly women with low levels of sulfated DHEA. Among the men, 29 received DHEA, 27 received testosterone, and 31 received placebo. Among the women, 27 received DHEA and 30 received placebo. Outcome measures included physical performance, body composition, bone mineral density (BMD), glucose tolerance, and quality of life. RESULTS: As compared with the change from baseline to 24 months in the placebo group, subjects who received DHEA for 2 years had an increase in plasma levels of sulfated DHEA by a median of 3.4 microg per milliliter (9.2 micromol per liter) in men and by 3.8 microg per milliliter (10.3 micromol per liter) in women. Among men who received testosterone, the level of bioavailable testosterone increased by a median of 30.4 ng per deciliter (1.1 nmol per liter), as compared with the change in the placebo group. A separate analysis of men and women showed no significant effect of DHEA on body-composition measurements. Neither hormone altered the peak volume of oxygen consumed per minute, muscle strength, or insulin sensitivity. Men who received testosterone had a slight increase in fat-free mass, and men in both treatment groups had an increase in BMD at the femoral neck. Women who received DHEA had an increase in BMD at the ultradistal radius. Neither treatment improved the quality of life or had major adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: Neither DHEA nor low-dose testosterone replacement in elderly people has physiologically relevant beneficial effects on body composition, physical performance, insulin sensitivity, or quality of life. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00254371 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).

Osteoporosis and the global competition for health care resources.

Global aging superimposed on existing infectious diseases and trauma will aggravate competition for health care resources to diagnose and treat osteoporosis. Efforts to implement public health measures are needed, but the targeted approach to assessment and treatment of high-risk individuals must also be refined. Increases in the elderly population worldwide will cause a dramatic rise in osteoporotic fractures, but other age-related diseases will increase as well. Changes will be superimposed on existing public health problems (e.g., malaria, alcoholism), and these acute health care needs will take priority in some areas. Societies in most parts of the world may have to limit osteoporosis control to broad public health measures, and such efforts (e.g., calcium and vitamin D supplementation) should be supported. In these regions, clinical decision-making will generally be limited to treating patients with fractures (who presumably have already failed any public health measures in place), or in a few wealthy countries, to patients with low bone density identified by case-finding. Case-finding approaches will vary with the resources available, although unselective (mass) screening by bone densitometry is largely ineffective and unaffordable anywhere. The key to clinical decision-making on behalf of individuals will be an assessment of absolute fracture risk, and the tools needed to predict the risk of an osteoporotic fracture over the next 10 years are now being developed. These include bone density measures, but also incorporate other risk factors (e.g., fracture history, corticosteroid use), which may allow extension of fracture risk prediction to nonwhite populations and to men. Even with a universal risk prediction tool, cost-effective treatment thresholds will vary by country based on the level of fracture risk in the region and on the resources available for health care. To better compete for these resources, efforts should be made to lower the cost of osteoporosis interventions. Additionally, evidence is needed that these interventions are really effective in reducing fractures in the community.