Comprehensive assessment of pain characteristics, quality of life, and pain management in cancer patients: a multi-center cross-sectional study.

INTRODUCTION: Pain is the most common complaint among cancer patients, significantly impairing their health-related quality of life (HRQOL). There is limited evidence on the characteristics of pain among cancer patients in Nepal with low-resource settings. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical characteristics of pain, factors influencing pain intensity, and the association of pain severity with quality of life (QoL) among cancer patients. Secondary objectives included investigating perceived barriers to pain management and medication adherence among these patients. METHODS: This multi-center, cross-sectional study enrolled adult patients (over 18 years old) with reported cancer diagnoses experiencing pain. Socio-demographic characteristics (e.g., age, gender, educational status), clinical characteristics (e.g. cancer diagnosis, staging), and pain characteristics (e.g., duration, type, location, medicines used for pain management, etc.) were recorded. Outcomes were assessed using the Numeric rating scale (NRS), Pain management Index, European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire, Barriers Questionnaire II, Medication Adherence Rating Scale, and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. RESULTS: Four hundred and eight patients participated in the study. The mean ± SD age was 54.87 ± 15.65, with 226 patients (55.4%) being female. The most common cancer diagnoses were cervical (17.6%), lung (11.8%), and colon/rectum (12.0%) cancers. The most common pain locations were the head and neck (27.0%); a majority (55.6%) reported pain duration of more than 3 months. Nociceptive pain was reported by 42.4% of patients; the mean ± SD of NRS was 4.31 ± 2.69, with 32.4% of patients experiencing moderate pain. Patients with mixed pain type (B = 1.458, p < 0.001) or pain in multiple sites (B = 1.175, p < 0.001), lower Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) (B = -1.308, p < 0.001), and specific cancer diagnoses such as prostate (B = -2.045, p = 0.002), pancreatic (B = 1.852, p = 0.004), oesophageal (B = 1.674, p = 0.012), and ovarian cancer (B = 1.967, p = 0.047), experienced varying degrees of increased NRS score. The combined chemotherapy and radiotherapy treatment modality was associated with a lower NRS score (B = -0.583, p = 0.017). A significant inverse relationship was observed between pain severity and global health status/QoL (B = -37.36, p < 0.001. Key barriers to pain management included moderate perceptions of physiological effects, communication issues between doctors and patients, and concerns about the harmful effects of pain medicine. The prevalence of non-adherence to pain medications was 13.97%. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, this study highlights the multi-faceted nature of pain management and QoL for cancer patients in Nepal with low-resource settings. These findings underscore the multifactorial nature of pain perception in cancer patients, with mixed pain types, pain in multiple sites, lower KPS, and specific cancer diagnoses, all contributing significantly to pain severity. Additionally, pain severity was associated with declining QoL. These findings contribute valuable insights into the complex aspects of cancer pain and its broader implications for the well-being of patients, offering a foundation for targeted interventions and improved pain management strategies in the context of cancer care in low-resource settings.

Validity and measurement equivalence of EQ-5D-5L questionnaire among heart failure patients in Malaysia: a cohort study.

AIM: This study aimed to examine the validity of EQ-5D-5L among HFrEF patients in Malaysia, and to explore the measurement equivalence of three main language versions. METHODS: We surveyed HFrEF patients from two hospitals in Malaysia, using Malay, English or Chinese versions of EQ-5D-5L. EQ-5D-5L dimensional scores were converted to utility scores using the Malaysian value set. A confirmatory factor analysis longitudinal model was constructed. The utility and visual analog scale (VAS) scores were evaluated for validity (convergent, known-group, responsiveness), and measurement equivalence of the three language versions. RESULTS: 200 HFrEF patients (mean age = 61 years), predominantly male (74%) of Malay ethnicity (55%), completed the admission and discharge EQ-5D-5L questionnaire in Malay (49%), English (26%) or Chinese (25%) languages. 173 patients (86.5%) were followed up at 1-month post-discharge (1MPD). The standardized factor loadings and average variance extracted were ≥ 0.5 while composite reliability was ≥ 0.7, suggesting convergent validity. Patients with older age and higher New York Heart Association (NYHA) class reported significantly lower utility and VAS scores. The change in utility and VAS scores between admission and discharge was large, while the change between discharge and 1MPD was minimal. The minimal clinically important difference for utility and VAS scores was ±0.19 and ±11.01, respectively. Malay and English questionnaire were equivalent while the equivalence of Malay and Chinese questionnaire was inconclusive. LIMITATION: This study only sampled HFrEF patients from two teaching hospitals, thus limiting the generalizability of results to the entire heart failure population. CONCLUSION: EQ-5D-5L is a valid questionnaire to measure health-related quality of life and estimate utility values among HFrEF patients in Malaysia. The Malay and English versions of EQ-5D-5L appear equivalent for clinical and economic assessments.

EQ-5D is the most commonly used questionnaire to measure patients' health-related quality of life in clinical trials and health technology assessments. To increase confidence over clinical trial findings that heart failure interventions improve health-related quality of life and quality-adjusted life years (number of years alive with equivalence health-related quality of life), the questionnaire used to measure health-related quality of life needs to be validated in the specific population. Since EQ-5D-5L has not been validated in Malaysia's heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) population, this study evaluated the psychometric properties (validity) of EQ-5D-5L among HFrEF patients in Malaysia and the equivalence of different versions of languages (i.e. Malay, Chinese and English) of EQ-5D-5L in measuring the health-related quality of life. The findings suggested that EQ-5D-5L is a valid questionnaire to measure the health-related quality of life in HFrEF patients and estimate the quality-adjusted life years. The Malay and English versions of EQ-5D-5L appear to be equivalent for use in clinical trials and health technology assessments.

Impact of pharmacist-delivered interventions on pain-related outcomes: An umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

INTRODUCTION: Pain is a significant healthcare challenge, impacting millions worldwide. Pharmacists have increasingly taken on expanded roles in managing pain, particularly in primary and ambulatory care contexts. This umbrella review aims to systematically evaluate evidence from published systematic reviews that explore the impact of pharmacist-delivered interventions on clinical, humanistic, and economic outcomes related to pain. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted across six electronic databases, including Ovid Embase, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Scopus, CENTRAL, APA PsycINFO, and DARE, from inception until June 2023. Prior to inclusion, two independent reviewers assessed study titles and abstracts. Following inclusion, an assessment of the methodological quality of the included studies was conducted. AMSTAR 2 was used to evaluate the methodological quality of the included SRs. RESULTS: From 2055 retrieved titles, 11 systematic reviews were included, with 5 out of 11 being meta-analyses. These SRs encompassed diverse pharmacist-led interventions such as education, medication reviews, and multi-component strategies targeting various facets of pain management. These findings showed favorable clinical outcomes, including reduced pain intensity, improved medication management, enhanced overall physical and mental well-being, and reduced hospitalization durations. Significant pain intensity reductions were found due to pharmacists' interventions, with standardized mean differences (SMDs) ranging from -0.76 to -0.22 across different studies and subgroups. Physical functioning improvements were observed, with SMDs ranging from -0.38 to 1.03. Positive humanistic outcomes were also reported, such as increased healthcare provider confidence, patient satisfaction, and quality of life (QoL). QoL improvements were reported, with SMDs ranging from 0.29 to 1.03. Three systematic reviews examined pharmacist interventions' impact on pain-related economic outcomes, highlighting varying cost implications and the need for robust research methodologies to capture costs and benefits. CONCLUSION: This umbrella review highlights the effectiveness of pharmacist-delivered interventions in improving clinical, humanistic, and economic outcomes related to pain management. Existing evidence emphasises on the need to integrate pharamacists into multi-disciplinary pain management teams. Further research is needed to investigate innovative care models, such as pharmacist-independent prescribing initiatives within collaborative pain management clinics.