Are you better? A multi-centre study of patient-defined recovery from Complex Regional Pain Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS) symptoms can significantly differ between patients, fluctuate over time, disappear or persist. This leads to problems in defining recovery and in evaluating the efficacy of therapeutic interventions. OBJECTIVES: To define recovery from the patients' perspective and better understand their priorities for treatment approaches. METHODS: Establishing an international consortium, we used a 2-Round Delphi-based study in eight countries across Europe and North America. Participants ≥18 years who met, or had met, Budapest clinical criteria were included. Round 1 participants completed the statement: 'I would/do consider myself recovered from CRPS if/because…' alongside demographic and health questionnaires. Data were thematically organised and represented as 62 statements, from which participants identified and ranked their recovery priorities in Round 2. RESULTS: Round 1 (N = 347, 80% female, 91% non-recovered) dominant ICF themes were: activities of daily living; bodily functions; external factors; participation and personal factors. The top five priority statements in Round 2 (N = 252) were: no longer having (1) CRPS-related pain, (2) generalised pain and discomfort, (3) restricted range of movement, (4) need for medication, (5) stiffness in the affected limb. With very few exceptions, priorities were consistent, irrespective of patient demographics/geography. Symptoms affecting daily activities were among those most frequently reported. CONCLUSIONS: Our data showed a small number of themes are of highest importance to CRPS patients' definition of recovery. Patients want their pain, movement restriction and reliance on medication to be addressed, above all other factors. These factors should therefore be foremost concerns for future treatment and rehabilitation programmes. SIGNIFICANCE: Those with longstanding CRPS may no longer meet diagnostic criteria but still be symptomatic. Defining recovery is therefore problematic in CRPS. Our study has identified patients' definition of recovery from CRPS, in order of priority, as relief from: their CRPS-related pain, generalised pain, movement restriction, reliance on medication, and stiffness.

Prospective, randomized, single-blind, sham treatment-controlled study of the safety and efficacy of an electromagnetic field device for the treatment of chronic low back pain: a pilot study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of therapeutic electromagnetic fields (TEMF) on chronic low back pain. Secondary objectives included the investigation of the effects of TEMF on psychometric measures. SETTING: Pain Research center in an Urban Academic Rehabilitation Facility. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, single-blind, placebo (sham) treatment-controlled design in which participants were evaluated over a 6-week period. A total of 40 subjects were randomly assigned: 20 subjects to 15 milliTESLA (mT) treatment using a prototype electromagnetic field device and 20 to sham treatment. INTERVENTIONS: After a 2-week baseline period, eligible individuals were randomized to one of the treatment groups (sham or 15 mT) for six 30-minute treatments over 2 weeks, then a 2-week follow-up period. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was the self-report of pain severity using a 100 mm visual analog scale collected using a twice daily McGill Pain Questionnaire-Short Form. Several secondary measures were assessed. RESULTS: Both groups (15 mT and sham) improved over time (P < 0.05). Although groups were similar during the treatment period, treated subjects (TEMF of 15 mT) improved significantly over sham treatment during the 2-week follow-up period (20.5% reduction in pain; F(1,34) = 10.62, P = 0.003). There were no reported serious adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that TEMF may be an effective and safe modality for the treatment of chronic low back pain disorders. More studies are needed to test this hypothesis.

Theoretical review: altered pain regulatory systems in chronic pain.

This review synthesizes the existing literature regarding the relationship between resting blood pressure and pain sensitivity, and the literature indicating possible endogenous opioid dysfunction in chronic pain. Adaptive interactions between the cardiovascular and pain regulatory systems occur in healthy individuals, with greater blood pressure associated with decreased acute pain sensitivity. Endogenous opioids appear necessary for full expression of this relationship. There is ample evidence indicating diminished endogenous opioid CSF/plasma levels in chronic pain patients, yet little is known about the functional effects of these opioid changes. A theoretical model is proposed based upon the literature reviewed suggesting progressive dysfunction in endogenous opioid systems with increasing chronic pain duration. This dysfunction is hypothesized to result in dysregulation of normally adaptive relationships between the cardiovascular and pain regulatory systems, resulting in increased chronic pain intensity and increased acute pain sensitivity among chronic pain patients. Preliminary data are consistent with the hypothesis of progressive opioid changes resulting in dysfunctional alterations in the adaptive blood pressure-pain relationship. Clinical implications of this theory are discussed.

Gabapentin: a new tool in the treatment of neuropathic pain.

Human neuropathic pain remains a prevalent and pervasive problem in our society. Pharmacologically there is also no single, uniformly well-tolerated drug that is reliably helpful. Gabapentin has emerged as a useful new tool based on the results of two large multicenter trials in models of human neuropathy. Gabapentin proved to be a significantly better analgesic than placebo, was well tolerated in the elderly population, and had a significant positive impact on several subjective and objective outcome measures. A discussion of the standard treatments and the studies supporting this new tool is the purpose of this review.

Controlled trial of ketorolac in tension-type headache.

Intramuscular ketorolac 60 mg, meperidine 50 mg plus promethazine 25 mg, and normal saline were compared in acute exacerbations of tension-type headache. Forty-one subjects (30 females and 11 males) were randomized into three groups and evaluated by the McGill Short-Form Pain Questionnaire before treatment, and 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 hours after treatment. All three groups showed a significant treatment effect that persisted for the 6 hours of evaluation. Ketorolac treatment was significantly better than placebo at 0.5 and 1 hour by the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Pain Rating Index, and better than meperidine at 2 hours (by the VAS). Meperidine and placebo did not differ at any time point. Ketorolac is effective in short-term treatment of tension-type headache.

External validation of IASP diagnostic criteria for Complex Regional Pain Syndrome and proposed research diagnostic criteria. International Association for the Study of Pain.

Recent work in our research consortium has raised internal validity concerns regarding the current IASP criteria for Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS), suggesting problems with inadequate sensitivity and specificity. The current study explored the external validity of these IASP criteria for CRPS. A standardized evaluation of signs and symptoms of CRPS was conducted by study physicians in 117 patients meeting IASP criteria for CRPS, and 43 patients experiencing neuropathic pain with established non-CRPS etiology (e.g. diabetic neuropathy, post-herpetic neuralgia). Multiple discriminant function analyses were used to test the ability of the IASP diagnostic criteria and decision rules, as well as proposed research modifications of these criteria, to discriminate between CRPS patients and those experiencing non-CRPS neuropathic pain. Current IASP criteria and decision rules (e.g. signs or symptoms of edema, or color changes or sweating changes satisfy criterion 3) discriminated significantly between groups (P < 0.001). However, although sensitivity was quite high (0.98), specificity was poor (0.36), and a positive diagnosis of CRPS was likely to be correct in as few as 40% of cases. Empirically-based research modifications to the criteria, which are more comprehensive and require presence of signs and symptoms, were also tested. These modified criteria were also able to discriminate significantly, between the CRPS and non-CRPS groups (P < 0.001). A decision rule, requiring at least two sign categories and four symptom categories to be positive optimized diagnostic efficiency, with a diagnosis of CRPS likely to be accurate in up to 84% of cases, and a diagnosis of non-CRPS neuropathic pain likely to be accurate in up to 88% of cases. These results indicate that the current IASP criteria for CRPS have inadequate specificity and are likely to lead to overdiagnosis. Proposed modifications to these criteria substantially improve their external validity and merit further evaluation.

Complex regional pain syndrome: are the IASP diagnostic criteria valid and sufficiently comprehensive?

This is a multisite study examining the internal validity and comprehensiveness of the International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) diagnostic criteria for Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS). A standardized sign/symptom checklist was used in patient evaluations to obtain data on CRPS-related signs and symptoms in a series of 123 patients meeting IASP criteria for CRPS. Principal components factor analysis (PCA) was used to detect statistical groupings of signs/symptoms (factors). CRPS signs and symptoms grouped together statistically in a manner somewhat different than in current IASP/CRPS criteria. As in current criteria, a separate pain/sensation criterion was supported. However, unlike in current criteria, PCA indicated that vasomotor symptoms form a factor distinct from a sudomotor/edema factor. Changes in range of motion, motor dysfunction, and trophic changes, which are not included in the IASP criteria, formed a distinct fourth factor. Scores on the pain/sensation factor correlated positively with pain duration (P<0. 001), but there was a negative correlation between the sudomotor/edema factor scores and pain duration (P<0.05). The motor/trophic factor predicted positive responses to sympathetic block (P<0.05). These results suggest that the internal validity of the IASP/CRPS criteria could be improved by separating vasomotor signs/symptoms (e.g. temperature and skin color asymmetry) from those reflecting sudomotor dysfunction (e.g. sweating changes) and edema. Results also indicate motor and trophic changes may be an important and distinct component of CRPS which is not currently incorporated in the IASP criteria. An experimental revision of CRPS diagnostic criteria for research purposes is proposed. Implications for diagnostic sensitivity and specificity are discussed.

A fourth empirically derived cluster of chronic pain patients based on the multidimensional pain inventory: evidence for repression within the dysfunctional group.

The authors proposed that chronic pain patients with repressive defenses are not represented in current 3-cluster solutions of the Multidimensional Pain Inventory (MPI; R. D. Kerns, D. C. Turk, & T. E. Rudy, 1985) and that such a group can be distinguished by using a measure of defensiveness together with subscales of the MPI. They expected these patients to be described both by high defensiveness and by elevated pain and disability but minimal emotional distress. For 178 pain patients, hierarchical cluster analyses were performed on the MPI and Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding (D. L. Paulhus, 1984). A 3-cluster solution replicated past findings in identifying dysfunctional, interpersonally distressed, and adaptive coper groups. A 4-cluster solution fit the data better, with a repressor group described by high pain, low activity and low distress emerging from the dysfunctional group. Profile analysis of validation measures showed that repressors scored comparably with dysfunctional patients on somatic symptoms of depression, pain severity, and perceived disability but significantly higher on these factors than the adaptive copers. Repressors scored comparably with adaptive copers on cognitive-affective symptoms of depression, anxiety, and anger but significantly lower on these variables than dysfunctional patients. Repressors also reported greater pain severity and perceived disability relative to their reports of negative affect, whereas dysfunctional and adaptive coper groups exhibited no such disparities. Without a measure of defensiveness, the MPI may misclassify a distinct group of patients as dysfunctional, but who readily endorse physical symptoms yet report low levels of emotional distress.

A clinical approach to complex regional pain syndrome.

The clinical approach to complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) is complicated by a lack of precision diagnostically, and a lack of evidence-based information for treatment. The vagaries of diagnosis were somewhat improved by the Orlando Conference (1993), where a consensus panel of experts developed a new taxonomy and criteria. Unfortunately the criteria can be based entirely on subjective grounds (patient history), and as such provides a very sensitive but not very specific device. There is some effort in the research community to amend these criteria to make them more specific. We encourage the practicing physician to include as much objective data along with the quasi-objective and subjective information currently used in formulating the diagnosis. This imprecision in diagnostic issues has significantly hampered treatment because it has not led to solid, generalizable, randomized controlled trials. To date there are no substantial scientific trials of any particular therapy or medication in the specific diagnosis of CRPS. Much can be inferred from the work with peripheral neuropathy and central pain. However, it is unlikely that this will be a perfect concordance with best therapy for CRPS. It remains our responsibility to diagnose each patient as best we can, supported by the best possible objective signs and testing. Once the diagnosis is made it is necessary to proceed in a pragmatic empirical way, following the best guidelines available. The guidelines should be considered a "rough sketch" and the key to clinical success will be flexibility, a vast fund of the available knowledge, patience, and compassion. To allow the deficiencies in the science to paralyze the clinical process is therapeutic nihilism, and not acceptable.

IASP diagnostic criteria for complex regional pain syndrome: a preliminary empirical validation study. International Association for the Study of Pain.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the ability of the International Association for the Study of Pain Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS) diagnostic criteria and associated features to discriminate between CRPS patients and patients with painful diabetic neuropathy. DESIGN: Prospective assessment of signs and symptoms in a series of CRPS and diabetic neuropathy patients. SETTING: University of Washington Multidisciplinary Pain Center. PATIENTS: A consecutive series of 18 CRPS patients and 30 diabetic neuropathy patients. INTERVENTIONS: Patients completed a 10-item patient history questionnaire assessing symptoms of CRPS prior to medical evaluation. The evaluating physician completed a 10-item patient examination questionnaire assessing objective signs of CRPS. OUTCOME MEASURES: The analyses conducted were designed to test the ability of CRPS signs and symptoms and associated features to discriminate between CRPS patients and diabetic neuropathy patients. RESULTS: Data analysis suggested that CRPS decision rules may lead to overdiagnosis of the disorder. Diagnosis based on self-reported symptoms can be diagnostically useful in some circumstances. The addition of trophic tissue changes, range of motion changes, and "burning" quality of pain did not improve diagnostic accuracy, but the addition of motor neglect signs did. Test of a CRPS scoring system resulted in improved accuracy relative to current criteria and decision rules. CONCLUSIONS: Poorly understood disorders lacking prototypical signs/symptoms and diagnostic laboratory testing must rely on the development of reliable diagnostic guidelines. The results of this study should assist in the further refinement of the CRPS diagnostic criteria.

Signs and symptoms of the myofascial pain syndrome: a national survey of pain management providers.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to assess clinical consensus regarding whether myofascial pain syndrome (MPS) is a legitimate and distinct diagnosis as well as the signs and symptoms characterizing MPS. DESIGN: A standardized mailed survey with return postage provided. SUBJECTS: A total of 1,663 American Pain Society members in medically related disciplines listed in the 1996/1997 directory. OUTCOME MEASURES: A standardized survey assessing clinical opinion regarding whether MPS is a legitimate diagnosis, whether MPS is a clinical entity distinct from fibromyalgia, and the signs and symptoms believed to be "essential to," "associated with," or "irrelevant to" to the diagnosis of MPS. RESULTS: Of the 403 surveys returned, 88.5% respondents reported that MPS was a legitimate diagnosis, with 81% describing MPS as distinct from fibromyalgia. The only signs and symptoms described as essential to the diagnosis of MPS by greater than 50% of the sample were regional location, presence of trigger points, and a normal neurologic examination. Regarding the signs and symptoms considered to be essential or associated with MPS, more than 80% of respondents agreed on regional location, trigger points, normal neurologic examination, reduced pain with local anesthetic or "spray and stretch," taut bands, tender points, palpable nodules, muscle ropiness, decreased range of motion, pain exacerbated by stress, and regional pain described as "dull," "achy," or "deep." Sensory or reflex abnormalities, scar tissue, and most test results were considered to be irrelevant to the diagnosis of MPS by a large proportion of the respondents. CONCLUSIONS: There was general agreement across specialties that MPS is a legitimate diagnosis distinct from fibromyalgia. There was a high level of agreement regarding the signs and symptoms essential or associated with a diagnosis of MPS. Differences across specialties are discussed. This survey provides a first step toward the development of consensus-based diagnostic criteria for MPS, which can then be validated empirically.

Norepinephrine and epinephrine levels in affected versus unaffected limbs in sympathetically maintained pain.

OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that there is relative sympathetic hyperactivity in the affected limb in patients with sympathetically maintained pain syndromes by measuring serum norepinephrine and epinephrine in the affected versus the unaffected sides. DESIGN: Venous pool samples were drawn just proximal to the affected area and from an identical site on the unaffected side. Serum norepinephrine and epinephrine were measured by high-pressure liquid chromatography with electrochemical detection. SUBJECTS: Sixteen women and seven men with a mean age of 44.4 years diagnosed as having sympathetically maintained pain on the basis of a positive response to paravertebral block and a criteria-based diagnostic scheme. RESULTS: The serum norepinephrine level was significantly lower in the affected limbs than the unaffected limbs (p = 0.024). The serum epinephrine level was not significantly different. CONCLUSIONS: These results are not consistent with the hypothesis of segmental sympathetic hyperactivity in the affected limb in sympathetically maintained pain and support a hypothesis of peripheral receptor upregulation with pathologic response to circulating catecholamines. Other possible explanations are discussed.

Chronic-pain medications: equivalence levels and method of quantifying usage.

Medication use is an important consideration in chronic-pain rehabilitation programs (CPRPs). However, it is difficult to quantify this aspect of chronic-pain treatment, because patients often take multiple medications that can differ by pharmacological class as well as dosage level. The Medication Quantification Scale (MQS) provides a method for quantifying medication use in patients with chronic, nonmalignant pain. Scores are calculated for each medication based on weights assigned by medication class and dosage level, and these scores are summed to provide a quantitative index of total medication usage suitable for statistical analysis. The method for calculating MQS scores is illustrated, and research data on MQS reliability and validity are presented. Interrater reliability was rho = 0.985 (p less than 0.0001) for 30 MQS scores calculated by two clinicians. MQS scores for 88 patients correlated well with the clinical judgment of 12 health care professionals (mean rho = 0.755, p less than 0.0001). The MQS scores for 60 chronic-pain patients (30 treated in a CPRP and 30 untreated) were obtained at two time points: evaluation and 1-year follow-up. A two (groups) by two (time points) analysis of variance yielded a significant group-by-time interaction (F = 8.82, p less than 0.0043). Treated patients decreased their medication intake significantly (p less than 0.0001), whereas untreated patients did not (p greater than 0.57). The MQS offers a reliable and valid method for quantifying medication usage in chronic-pain patients.

New developments in rehabilitation of neuropathic pain syndromes.

The common medical treatments of neuropathic pain, medication and nerve blocks, are often only partially effective in providing significant and long-term pain relief. Patients suffering chronic pain often fall prey to associated emotional suffering, functional impairment, and difficulties in multiple areas of their lives, including family disruption, social withdrawal, and vocational disability. An interdisciplinary approach to pain management draws on the skills of physical and occupational therapists, pain psychologists, biofeedback specialists, and vocational counselors. It focuses on both pain management and functional restoration, and should be considered standard treatment for chronically painful conditions. Interdisciplinary pain management views the patient as an active agent, responsible for learning and applying self-management techniques for controlling pain, with the staff assuming a teaching and consulting role. Although much more labor intensive, interdisciplinary pain management is more effective over time in managing chronic pain, in preventing unnecessary emotional and physical impairment, and in controlling overall medical costs.

Cognitive factors influence outcome following multidisciplinary chronic pain treatment: a replication and extension of a cross-lagged panel analysis.

Reducing maladaptive cognitions is hypothesized to constitute an active therapeutic process in multidisciplinary pain programs featuring cognitive-behavioral interventions. A cross-lagged panel design was used to determine whether: a) early-treatment cognitive changes predicted late-treatment pain, interference, activity and mood changes, but not vice versa; b) three cognitive factors made unique contributions to outcome; c) substantial cognitive changes preceded substantial improvements in outcome. Sixty-five chronic pain patients, participating in a 4-week multidisciplinary program, completed measures of pain helplessness, catastrophizing, pain-related anxiety (process factors), pain severity, interference, activity level and depression (outcomes) at pre-, mid- and posttreatment. Results showed that early-treatment reductions in pain helplessness predicted late-treatment decreases in pain and interference, but not vice versa, and that early-treatment reductions in catastrophizing and pain-related anxiety predicted late-treatment improvements in pain severity, but not vice versa. Findings suggested that the three process factors predicted improvements mostly in common. However, little evidence was found that large early-treatment reductions in process variables preceded extensive improvements in pain. Findings replicate those of a recent report regarding cross-lagged effects, and offer support that cognitive changes may indeed influence late-treatment changes in outcomes.

A review of three commonly prescribed skeletal muscle relaxants.

Skeletal muscle relaxants (SMR) are commonly used drugs prescribed for the treatment of muscle spasm and discomfort. Although many have been in use for decades, physicians may be unaware of the accumulating evidence of their risks, benefits, safety and side effects. This review examines the efficacy, side effects, and safety of three commonly prescribed SMRs: metaxalone, cyclobenzaprine, and carisoprodol. All three appear to have equal efficacy, but their side effects vary considerably. Metaxalone has the fewest reports of side effects, and no reports of major safety issues. Cyclobenzaprine, closely related to the tricyclic antidepressants, causes the expected lethargy and anticholinergic side effects, and may have some toxicity in overdose and in combination with other substances. Carisoprodol raises the greatest concern. Reports in the literature suggest a significant potential for physical and psychological dependence perhaps suggesting a potential for misuse. It also has, perhaps, the greatest toxicity. A secondary goal of this review is to stimulate more discourse about these commonly used, but poorly understood compounds.

Nicotine and caffeine intake in complex regional pain syndrome.

UNLABELLED: {\it OBJECTIVE: } Nicotine and caffeine are vasoconstrictors. Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) is defined to involve disproportionate pain and autonomic dysfunction [1]. The objectives of this study were to identify the prevalence of smoking and caffeine intake in CRPS, to explore the relationship of pain intensity with smoking and caffeine consumption, and to explore the relationship of pain intensity, anxiety and disability among CRPS patients who smoke, use caffeine, or both. {\it DESIGN: } One hundred eleven patients, with CRPS type I or II, from two academic rehabilitation pain clinics were reviewed. Data were collected retrospectively by reviewing CRPS patients' self-reported pain level using visual analogue scales (VAS), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), Pain Disability Index (PDI), and Pain Anxiety Symptoms Scale (PASS). Status of daily smoking and caffeine consumption were also recorded. {\it RESULTS: } Smoking prevalence among CRPS was significant higher than the national average (p < 0.001). There were no significant relationships between the perceived pain level and either daily smoking, daily caffeine intake, or both (p > 0.430). In patients with CRPS I higher PASS scores were positively associated with dichotomous use of smoking and caffeine (p < 0.05). The PASS scores among patients with CRPS~II were not available for analysis. {\it CONCLUSIONS: } The smoking prevalence was higher than the national average among patients with CRPS I and II. Among patients with CRPS~I smoking and caffeine consumption were greater in those who reported more pain-related anxiety, but did not influence pain intensity. The clinical implications of these findings will be discussed.

Pain, psychological status, and functional recovery in chronic pain patients on daily opioids: a case comparison.

Long-term opioid therapy for chronic benign pain remains controversial. Most studies on the effectiveness of such regimens have been case series or case comparisons and very few randomized placebo-controlled studies are available. Overall, this research has produced mixed results. The current study sought to further explore issues regarding the effectiveness of opioids for chronic pain and to examine the use of adjunctive medications in these patients. A random sample of 100 patients taking daily opioids (Opioid) and 100 taking no opioids (Non-opioid) at evaluation were selected from the patient population of a tertiary care multidisciplinary pain program. Statistical analyses revealed that the two groups did not differ regarding pain type, duration, location, or surgical history. Non-Caucasians were less likely to be taking opioids than Caucasians (p<0.05). Relative to the Non-opioid group, Opioid patients were less frequently taking non-steroidal anti-inflammatories (p<0.01) and were more often taking anxiolytics (p<0.05) and muscle relaxants (p<0.01). Opioid patients reported higher (p<0.05) current pain and more frequently (p<0.05) reported current or past clinical depression or anxiety. No other significant differences were noted on measures of pain, psychological status, or functioning. Statistical removal of the effects of pain differences did not alter the pattern of results for psychological and functional measures. Although the study design employed did not allow determination of causality, it is consistent with previous work which has failed to reveal any advantage to use of daily opioids in the chronic pain population with regard to analgesia, decreased adjunctive medication use, or functional recovery. Well-designed, prospective, randomized studies are needed, but the current results suggest continued caution in the use of daily opioids until such studies become available.

Guidelines for program evaluation in chronic non-malignant pain management.

The current article offers guidelines to systematically evaluate programs which treat chronic non-malignant pain syndrome patients. The guidelines represent a basic program evaluation strategy and include specific recommendations and choices on measurement-assessment tools based upon available research literature and common clinical practice. They are based on evaluation by objectives, which include the program's ability to reduce the misuse of medications, increase physical function, increase productive activity at home, work and socially, improve overall mood, reduce subjective pain intensity, reduce the use of healthcare, when applicable, achieve equitable case settlement, and minimize pain treatment program cost without compromising quality of care. The method and timing of assessing each of these objectives are delineated with an emphasis on using reliable, valid measures which can be applied effectively within a clinical setting. The guidelines also advocate patient and staff satisfaction assessment, thus offering a fully integrated program evaluation system which can measure effectiveness and allow ongoing improvement in care.

Clinical practice guidelines for chronic non-malignant pain syndrome patients.

The current paper provides specific guidelines for treating chronic non-malignant pain syndrome patients. The guidelines were developed from an extensive review of existing literature on practice guidelines, the research literature, and common clinical practice across major pain treatment facilities in the USA. They are intended for application to all chronic pain syndrome patients (other than cancer pain) regardless of specific site or etiology of pain. They advocate goal directed treatment to reduce medication misuse and invasive medical procedures, maximize and maintain physical activity, return to productive activity, increase the patient's ability to manage pain, reduce subjective pain intensity, reduce or eliminate the use of healthcare services for primary pain complaint, provide useful information for case settlement, and minimize treatment cost without sacrificing quality. The guidelines recommend interdisciplinary integrated evaluation and treatment on a time limit basis with a focus on conservative medical, psychological behavioral, physical, and vocational interventions based upon the patient's needs. There is emphasis on increasing the patient's level of function and ability to manage pain and related problems. Outpatient care is strongly recommended, with specific upper limits regarding treatment intensity and the use of trigger point injections and nerve blocks delineated. The guidelines also recommend that the long term use of opioid or sedative-hypnotic medications, surgery, implantable spinal devices, or brain stimulation techniques be avoided with chronic pain syndrome patients. These guidelines are intended to serve as a starting point to effectively extend and complement those released by the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research for other types of pain problems such as cancer and acute low back pain.