Evoked oscillatory cortical activity during acute pain: Probing brain in pain by transcranial magnetic stimulation combined with electroencephalogram.

Temporal dynamics of local cortical rhythms during acute pain remain largely unknown. The current study used a novel approach based on transcranial magnetic stimulation combined with electroencephalogram (TMS-EEG) to investigate evoked-oscillatory cortical activity during acute pain. Motor (M1) and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) were probed by TMS, respectively, to record oscillatory power (event-related spectral perturbation and relative spectral power) and phase synchronization (inter-trial coherence) by 63 EEG channels during experimentally induced acute heat pain in 24 healthy participants. TMS-EEG was recorded before, during, and after noxious heat (acute pain condition) and non-noxious warm (Control condition), delivered in a randomized sequence. The main frequency bands (α, ß1, and ß2) of TMS-evoked potentials after M1 and DLPFC stimulation were recorded close to the TMS coil and remotely. Cold and heat pain thresholds were measured before TMS-EEG. Over M1, acute pain decreased α-band oscillatory power locally and α-band phase synchronization remotely in parietal-occipital clusters compared with non-noxious warm (all p < .05). The remote (parietal-occipital) decrease in α-band phase synchronization during acute pain correlated with the cold (p = .001) and heat pain thresholds (p = .023) and to local (M1) α-band oscillatory power decrease (p = .024). Over DLPFC, acute pain only decreased ß1-band power locally compared with non-noxious warm (p = .015). Thus, evoked-oscillatory cortical activity to M1 stimulation is reduced by acute pain in central and parietal-occipital regions and correlated with pain sensitivity, in contrast to DLPFC, which had only local effects. This finding expands the significance of α and ß band oscillations and may have relevance for pain therapies.

The clinical course of acute, subacute and persistent low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the clinical course of low back pain is essential to informing treatment recommendations and patient stratification. Our aim was to update our previous systematic review and meta-analysis to gain a better understanding of the clinical course of acute, subacute and persistent low back pain. METHODS: To update our 2012 systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched the Embase, MEDLINE and CINAHL databases from 2011 until January 2023, using our previous search strategy. We included prospective inception cohort studies if they reported on participants with acute (< 6 wk), subacute (6 to less than 12 wk) or persistent (12 to less than 52 wk) nonspecific low back pain at study entry. Primary outcome measures included pain and disability (0-100 scale). We assessed risk of bias of included studies using a modified tool and assessed the level of confidence in pooled estimates using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) tool. We used a mixed model design to calculate pooled estimates (mean, 95% confidence interval [CI]) of pain and disability at 0, 6, 12, 26 and 52 weeks. We treated time in 2 ways: time since study entry (inception time uncorrected) and time since pain onset (inception time corrected). We transformed the latter by adding the mean inception time to the time of study entry. RESULTS: We included 95 studies, with 60 separate cohorts in the systematic review (n = 17 974) and 47 cohorts (n = 9224) in the meta-analysis. Risk of bias of included studies was variable, with poor study attrition and follow-up, and most studies did not select participants as consecutive cases. For the acute pain cohort, the estimated mean pain score with inception time uncorrected was 56 (95% CI 49-62) at baseline, 26 (95% CI 21-31) at 6 weeks, 22 (95% CI 18-26) at 26 weeks and 21 (95% CI 17-25) at 52 weeks (moderate-certainty evidence). For the subacute pain cohort, the mean pain score was 63 (95% CI 55-71) at baseline, 29 (95% CI 22-37) at 6 weeks, 29 (95% CI 22-36) at 26 weeks and 31 (95% 23-39) at 52 weeks (moderate-certainty evidence). For the persistent pain cohort, the mean pain score was 56 (95% CI 37-74) at baseline, 48 (95% CI 32-64) at 6 weeks, 43 (95% CI 29-57) at 26 weeks and 40 (95% CI 27-54) at 52 weeks (very low-certainty evidence). The clinical course of disability was slightly more favourable than the clinical course of pain. INTERPRETATION: Participants with acute and subacute low back pain had substantial improvements in levels of pain and disability within the first 6 weeks ( moderate-certainty evidence); however, participants with persistent low back pain had high levels of pain and disability with minimal improvements over time (very low-certainty evidence). Identifying and escalating care in individuals with subacute low back pain who are recovering slowly could be a focus of intervention to reduce the likelihood of transition into persistent low back pain. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO - CRD42020207442.

Acupuncture Versus Oral Medications for Acute/Subacute Non-Specific Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Pharmacologic intervention do not always achieve benefits in the treatment of acute/subacute non-specific low back pain (NSLBP). We assessed efficacy and safety of acupuncture for acute/subacute NSLBP as alternative treatment. RECENT FINDINGS: We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Epistemonikos, CNKI, Wan Fang Database, VIP database, CBMLD, CSTJ, clinical trials, EUCTR, World WHO ICTRP, and ChiCTR for randomized controlled trials, cross-over studies, and cohort studies of NSLBP treated by acupuncture versus oral medication from inception to 23th April 2022. A total of 6 784 records were identified, and 14 studies were included 1 263 participants in this review. The results of the meta-analysis indicated that acupuncture therapy was slightly more effective than oral medication in improving pain (P < 0.00001, I2 = 92%, MD = -1.17, 95% CI [-1.61, -0.72]). According to the results of the meta-analysis, acupuncture therapy exhibited a significant advantage over oral medication with a substantial effect (P < 0.00001, I2 = 90%, SMD = -1.42, 95% CI [-2.22, -0.62]). Based on the results of the meta-analysis, acupuncture therapy was associated with a 12% improvement rate compared to oral medication in patients with acute/subacute NSLBP (P < 0.0001, I2 = 54%, RR = 1.11, 95% CI [1.05, 1.18]). Acupuncture is more effective and safer than oral medication in treating acute/subacute NSLBP. This systematic review is poised to offer valuable guidance to clinicians treating acute/subacute NSLBP and potentially benefit the afflicted patients. REGISTRATION: This review was registered in PROSPERO ( http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero ) with registration number CRD42021278346.

Physical therapy for acute and sub-acute low back pain: A systematic review and expert consensus.

OBJECTIVE: To review the effectiveness of different physical therapies for acute and sub-acute low back pain supported by evidence, and create clinical recommendations and expert consensus for physiotherapists on clinical prescriptions. DATA SOURCES: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed and the Cochrane Library for studies published within the previous 15 years. REVIEW METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis, randomized controlled trials assessing patients with acute and sub-acute low back pain were included. Two reviewers independently screened relevant studies using the same inclusion criteria. The Physiotherapy Evidence Database and the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews tool were used to grade the quality assessment of randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews, respectively. The final recommendation grades were based on the consensus discussion results of the Delphi of 22 international experts. RESULTS: Twenty-one systematic reviews and 21 randomized controlled trials were included. Spinal manipulative therapy and low-level laser therapy are recommended for acute low back pain. Core stability exercise/motor control, spinal manipulative therapy, and massage can be used to treat sub-acute low back pain. CONCLUSIONS: The consensus statements provided medical staff with appliable recommendations of physical therapy for acute and sub-acute low back pain. This consensus statement will require regular updates after 5-10 years.

Effects of foam roller on pain intensity in individuals with chronic and acute musculoskeletal pain: a systematic review of randomized trials.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the effects of using foam roller on pain intensity in individuals with chronic and acute musculoskeletal pain. METHODS: This systematic review was registered in the National Institute for Health Research's prospective online registry of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) under CRD42023456841. The databases Pubmed, Medline (via Ovid), Embase, BVS, and PEDro (Physiotherapy Evidence Database) were consulted to carry out this systematic review. Notably, the records of clinical trials characterized as eligible were manually searched. The search terms were: (foam rolling OR foam rolling vibration) AND (acute musculoskeletal pain) AND (chronic musculoskeletal pain). The search was performed until August 22, 2023. For the analysis of the methodological quality, the PEDro scale was used for each of the manuscripts included in the systematic review. Due to the heterogeneity in the studies included in this systematic review, performing a meta-analysis of the analyzed variables was impossible. RESULTS: Only six manuscripts were eligible for data analysis. The type of FR used was non-vibrational, being applied by a therapist in only one of the manuscripts. With an application time ranging from at least 45 s to 15 min, the non-vibrational FR was applied within a day up to six weeks. Using the PEDro scale, scores were assigned that varied between 4 and 8 points, with an average of 6 ± 1.29 points. Only two randomized clinical trials found a significant benefit in pain intensity of adding FR associated with a therapeutic exercise protocol in individuals with patellofemoral pain syndrome and chronic neck pain. CONCLUSION: The results of this systematic review do not elucidate or reinforce the clinical use of FR in pain intensity in individuals with chronic and acute musculoskeletal pain.

Impact of a Strategy for Improving Early Management of Acute Pain in the Pediatric Emergency Department.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to measure the impact of an intervention on pain treatment in a pediatric emergency department (ED). The application of interventions to improve pain management in DE has demonstrated diverse effects so far, most of them successful. METHODS: This is a quasi-experimental before-and-after, longitudinal, prospective study.Patients were collected between January 2020 and December 2021. Principal outcome was the number of patients with moderate or severe pain who received analgesia before 30 minutes to the ED arrival. The intervention consisted of several training sessions for nursing staff, pediatricians, and trauma physicians. RESULTS: A total of 515 patients were enrolled, 230 during preintervention period and 285 during postintervention period. The percentage of patients receiving analgesia before 30 minutes increased from 24% to 29% and before 60 minutes increased from 31% to 42%. Time to analgesia administration decreased from 43 to 39 minutes.Only 254 patients (49%) received analgesia at some point during their stay in the ED, 137 (26.6%) before 30 minutes and 193 (37.5%) before 60 minutes. The probability of receiving analgesia was greater in patients seen by a pediatrician rather than an orthopedist (59%-37%). Metamizole was the most commonly used drug (48%), followed by ibuprofen and acetaminophen. CONCLUSIONS: The application strategies to enhance early pain treatment in the ED can improve analgesia administration. Training strategies aimed at healthcare personnel working in the ED can change the way they work and achieve clear benefits for the patient. The treatment of pain in the ED should begin as soon as possible, and in this objective, the involvement of the nursing staff is a priority, because they are the professional who has the best opportunity for the detection and treatment of pain from the moment of triage.

Wilderness Medical Society Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Treatment of Acute Pain in Austere Environments: 2024 Update.

The Wilderness Medical Society (WMS) convened an expert panel to develop evidence-based guidelines for the management of pain in austere environments. Recommendations are graded based on the quality of supporting evidence as defined by criteria put forth by the American College of Chest Physicians. This is an update of the 2014 version of the "WMS Practice Guidelines for the Treatment of Acute Pain in Remote Environments" published in Wilderness & Environmental Medicine 2014; 25:41-49.

Management of Acute Sickle Cell Disease Pain.

Pain is a common complication of sickle cell disease. Sickle cell pain can often be effectively managed by pediatricians in outpatient and hospital settings. Acute pain management should be initiated quickly. Patients need to be evaluated for sickle cell complications and other causes of pain. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and opioids are the mainstay of pain treatment, but additional therapies include hydration, local pain control, muscle relaxants, and nonpharmacologic approaches. Healthy lifestyle habits and good behavioral and mental health are important for preventing and coping with sickle cell disease pain. Disease-modifying therapies, such as hydroxyurea, can help prevent sickle hemoglobin polymerization and acute pain episodes. Because sickle cell disease largely affects people who are racialized minorities in the United States, health-care providers need to be aware of how their own personal biases may affect care of these patients.

[Management of acute and chronic anal pain]. / Prise en charge des douleurs anales aiguës et chroniques.

Anal pain can be acute (most commonly related to anal fissure, perianal abcess or fistula, perianal vein thrombosis) or chronic (functional or neuropathic) including levator ani syndrome, proctalgia fugax, pudendal nevralgia and coccygodynia. History and clinical examination are keys to diagnose acute causes. Diagnosis of chronic anal pain on the other hand is more challenging and based on thorough history and analysis of symptoms. The aim of this article is to discuss the main etiologies and treatments of acute and chronic anal pain, including an update on the management and treatment of hemorrhoidal disease and postoperative pain management.

La douleur anale peut être de survenue aiguë (le plus fréquemment en lien avec une fissure anale, un abcès ou fistule anale, ou une thrombose des veines périanales) ou chronique (fonctionnelle ou neuropathique), comportant le syndrome du releveur de l'anus, la proctalgia fugax, la névralgie du pudendal et les coccygodynies. Le diagnostic d'une douleur anale aiguë est rapidement posé grâce à l'anamnèse et surtout l'examen clinique. Les causes chroniques sont en revanche plus difficiles à diagnostiquer et nécessitent un interrogatoire détaillé avec une analyse approfondie des symptômes. Le but de cet article est d'explorer le traitement des étiologies de douleur anale aiguë, de pouvoir reconnaître une grande part des douleurs anales chroniques, sans oublier une mise à jour sur la maladie hémorroïdaire avec la prévention et gestion des douleurs postopératoires.

Patient Perspectives on Seeking Emergency Care for Acute Low Back Pain and Access to Physical Therapy in the Emergency Department.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Low back pain is a common reason for visiting the emergency department (ED), yet little is known about patient motivations for seeking emergency care. The purpose of this study was to explore patient perspectives on visiting the ED for low back pain to inform a more patient-centered approach to emergency care. METHODS: We conducted focus group discussions and individual interviews among patients visiting an urban academic ED for acute low back pain. We recruited participants from an ongoing prospective study of 101 patients receiving either ED-initiated physical therapy or usual care. We conducted discussions, and interviews using an a priori developed discussion guide. We audio recorded, transcribed, and iteratively content analyzed the data using a consensual qualitative approach until thematic saturation was reached. RESULTS: We conducted 4 focus group discussions among 18 participants (median age 46.5 years, 66.7% women, 61.1% Black) and individual interviews with 27 participants (median age 45 years, 55.6% women, 44.4% White). No new themes emerged during the fourth and final focus group. We identified 5 summary themes: (1) the decision to seek emergency care for low back pain is motivated by severe pain, resulting disability, and fears about a catastrophic diagnosis, (2) participants sought various goals from their ED visit but emphasized the primacy of pain control, (3) participants were reluctant to use pain medications but also acknowledged their benefit, (4) participants perceived a number of benefits from direct access to an ED physical therapist in the ED, and (5) participation in physical therapy ultimately facilitated recovery, but the pain was a barrier to performing exercises. CONCLUSIONS: These patient perspectives and resulting themes may be used to inform a more patient-centered emergency care experience and contextualize quantitative research findings on ED care for low back pain.

Non-pharmacological management of infant and young child procedural pain.

BACKGROUND: Despite evidence of the long-term implications of unrelieved pain during infancy, it is evident that infant pain is still under-managed and unmanaged. Inadequately managed pain in infancy, a period of exponential development, can have implications across the lifespan. Therefore, a comprehensive and systematic review of pain management strategies is integral to appropriate infant pain management. This is an update of a previously published review update in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2015, Issue 12) of the same title. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and adverse events of non-pharmacological interventions for infant and child (aged up to three years) acute pain, excluding kangaroo care, sucrose, breastfeeding/breast milk, and music. SEARCH METHODS: For this update, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE-Ovid platform, EMBASE-OVID platform, PsycINFO-OVID platform, CINAHL-EBSCO platform and trial registration websites (ClinicalTrials.gov; International Clinical Trials Registry Platform) (March 2015 to October 2020). An update search was completed in July 2022, but studies identified at this point were added to 'Awaiting classification' for a future update.  We also searched reference lists and contacted researchers via electronic list-serves.  We incorporated 76 new studies into the review.  SELECTION CRITERIA: Participants included infants from birth to three years in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or cross-over RCTs that had a no-treatment control comparison. Studies were eligible for inclusion in the analysis if they compared a non-pharmacological pain management strategy to a no-treatment control group (15 different strategies). In addition, we also analysed studies when the unique effect of adding a non-pharmacological pain management strategy onto another pain management strategy could be assessed (i.e. additive effects on a sweet solution, non-nutritive sucking, or swaddling) (three strategies). The eligible control groups for these additive studies were sweet solution only, non-nutritive sucking only, or swaddling only, respectively. Finally, we qualitatively described six interventions that met the eligibility criteria for inclusion in the review, but not in the analysis.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The outcomes assessed in the review were pain response (reactivity and regulation) and adverse events. The level of certainty in the evidence and risk of bias were based on the Cochrane risk of bias tool and the GRADE approach. We analysed the standardised mean difference (SMD) using the generic inverse variance method to determine effect sizes.  MAIN RESULTS: We included total of 138 studies (11,058 participants), which includes an additional 76 new studies for this update. Of these 138 studies, we analysed 115 (9048 participants) and described 23 (2010 participants) qualitatively. We described qualitatively studies that could not be meta-analysed due to being the only studies in their category or statistical reporting issues. We report the results of the 138 included studies here. An SMD effect size of 0.2 represents a small effect, 0.5 a moderate effect, and 0.8 a large effect. The thresholds for the I2 interpretation were established as follows: not important (0% to 40%); moderate heterogeneity (30% to 60%); substantial heterogeneity (50% to 90%); considerable heterogeneity (75% to 100%). The most commonly studied acute procedures were heel sticks (63 studies) and needlestick procedures for the purposes of vaccines/vitamins (35 studies). We judged most studies to have high risk of bias (103 out of 138), with the most common methodological concerns relating to blinding of personnel and outcome assessors. Pain responses were examined during two separate pain phases: pain reactivity (within the first 30 seconds after the acutely painful stimulus) and immediate pain regulation (after the first 30 seconds following the acutely painful stimulus). We report below the strategies with the strongest evidence base for each age group. In preterm born neonates, non-nutritive sucking may reduce pain reactivity (SMD -0.57, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.03 to -0.11, moderate effect; I2 = 93%, considerable heterogeneity) and improve immediate pain regulation (SMD -0.61, 95% CI -0.95 to -0.27, moderate effect; I2 = 81%, considerable heterogeneity), based on very low-certainty evidence. Facilitated tucking may also reduce pain reactivity (SMD -1.01, 95% CI -1.44 to -0.58, large effect; I2 = 93%, considerable heterogeneity) and improve immediate pain regulation (SMD -0.59, 95% CI -0.92 to -0.26, moderate effect; I2 = 87%, considerable heterogeneity); however, this is also based on very low-certainty evidence. While swaddling likely does not reduce pain reactivity in preterm neonates (SMD -0.60, 95% CI -1.23 to 0.04, no effect; I2 = 91%, considerable heterogeneity), it has been shown to possibly improve immediate pain regulation (SMD -1.21, 95% CI -2.05 to -0.38, large effect; I2 = 89%, considerable heterogeneity), based on very low-certainty evidence. In full-term born neonates, non-nutritive sucking may reduce pain reactivity (SMD -1.13, 95% CI -1.57 to -0.68, large effect; I2 = 82%, considerable heterogeneity) and improve immediate pain regulation (SMD -1.49, 95% CI -2.20 to -0.78, large effect; I2 = 92%, considerable heterogeneity), based on very low-certainty evidence.  In full-term born older infants, structured parent involvement was the intervention most studied. Results showed that this intervention has little to no effect in reducing pain reactivity (SMD -0.18, 95% CI -0.40 to 0.03, no effect; I2 = 46%, moderate heterogeneity) or improving immediate pain regulation (SMD -0.09, 95% CI -0.40 to 0.21, no effect; I2 = 74%, substantial heterogeneity), based on low- to moderate-certainty evidence. Of these five interventions most studied, only two studies observed adverse events, specifically vomiting (one preterm neonate) and desaturation (one full-term neonate hospitalised in the NICU) following the non-nutritive sucking intervention. The presence of considerable heterogeneity limited our confidence in the findings for certain analyses, as did the preponderance of evidence of very low to low certainty based on GRADE judgements. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Overall, non-nutritive sucking, facilitated tucking, and swaddling may reduce pain behaviours in preterm born neonates. Non-nutritive sucking may also reduce pain behaviours in full-term neonates. No interventions based on a substantial body of evidence showed promise in reducing pain behaviours in older infants. Most analyses were based on very low- or low-certainty grades of evidence and none were based on high-certainty evidence. Therefore, the lack of confidence in the evidence would require further research before we could draw a definitive conclusion.

The McKenzie method for (sub)acute non-specific low back pain.

BACKGROUND: There is widespread agreement amongst clinicians that people with non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) comprise a heterogeneous group and that their management should be individually tailored. One treatment known by its tailored design is the McKenzie method (e.g. an individualized program of exercises based on clinical clues observed during assessment). OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of the McKenzie method in people with (sub)acute non-specific low back pain. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and two trials registers up to 15 August 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effectiveness of the McKenzie method in adults with (sub)acute (less than 12 weeks) NSLBP. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. MAIN RESULTS: This review included five RCTs with a total of 563 participants recruited from primary or tertiary care. Three trials were conducted in the USA, one in Australia, and one in Scotland. Three trials received financial support from non-commercial funders and two did not provide information on funding sources. All trials were at high risk of performance and detection bias. None of the included trials measured adverse events. McKenzie method versus minimal intervention (educational booklet; McKenzie method as a supplement to other intervention - main comparison) There is low-certainty evidence that the McKenzie method may result in a slight reduction in pain in the short term (MD -7.3, 95% CI -12.0 to -2.56; 2 trials, 377 participants) but not in the intermediate term (MD -5.0, 95% CI -14.3 to 4.3; 1 trial, 180 participants). There is low-certainty evidence that the McKenzie method may not reduce disability in the short term (MD -2.5, 95% CI -7.5 to 2.0; 2 trials, 328 participants) nor in the intermediate term (MD -0.9, 95% CI -7.3 to 5.6; 1 trial, 180 participants). McKenzie method versus manual therapy There is low-certainty evidence that the McKenzie method may not reduce pain in the short term (MD -8.7, 95% CI -27.4 to 10.0; 3 trials, 298 participants) and may result in a slight increase in pain in the intermediate term (MD 7.0, 95% CI 0.7 to 13.3; 1 trial, 235 participants). There is low-certainty evidence that the McKenzie method may not reduce disability in the short term (MD -5.0, 95% CI -15.0 to 5.0; 3 trials, 298 participants) nor in the intermediate term (MD 4.3, 95% CI -0.7 to 9.3; 1 trial, 235 participants). McKenzie method versus other interventions (massage and advice) There is very low-certainty evidence that the McKenzie method may not reduce disability in the short term (MD 4.0, 95% CI -15.4 to 23.4; 1 trial, 30 participants) nor in the intermediate term (MD 10.0, 95% CI -8.9 to 28.9; 1 trial, 30 participants). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on low- to very low-certainty evidence, the treatment effects for pain and disability found in our review were not clinically important. Thus, we can conclude that the McKenzie method is not an effective treatment for (sub)acute NSLBP.

Cultural Framing and the Impact On Acute Pain and Pain Services.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Optimal treatment requires a thorough understanding of all factors contributing to pain in the individual patient. In this review, we investigate the influence of cultural frameworks on pain experience and management. RECENT FINDINGS: The loosely defined concept of culture in pain management integrates a predisposing set of diverse biological, psychological and social characteristics shared within a group. Cultural and ethnic background strongly influence the perception, manifestation, and management of pain. In addition, cultural, racial and ethnic differences continue to play a major role in the disparate treatment of acute pain. A holistic and culturally sensitive approach is likely to improve pain management outcomes, will better cover the needs of diverse patient populations and help reduce stigma and health disparities. Mainstays include awareness, self-awareness, appropriate communication, and training.

Meditation as an Adjunct to the Management of Acute Pain.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: We aim to present current understanding and evidence for meditation, mostly referring to mindfulness meditation, for the management of acute pain and potential opportunities of incorporating it into the acute pain service practice. RECENT FINDINGS: There is conflicting evidence concerning meditation as a remedy in acute pain. While some studies have found a bigger impact of meditation on the emotional response to a painful stimulus than on the reduction in actual pain intensities, functional Magnet Resonance Imaging has enabled the identification of various brain areas involved in meditation-induced pain relief. Potential benefits of meditation in acute pain treatment include changes in neurocognitive processes. Practice and Experience are necessary to induce pain modulation. In the treatment of acute pain, evidence is emerging only recently. Meditative techniques represent a promising approach for acute pain in various settings.

Ultrasound guided lumbar erector spinae block: A case series on a novel technique for the treatment of acute low Back pain.

Low back pain is among one of the most common presentations to the emergency department (ED). Regional anesthesia has recently gained traction as an option for analgesia in ED patients, especially in the wake of the opioid epidemic. Data on lumbar application of the ESPB in the setting of acute, refractory low back pain in the ED is scarce. We describe a series of three cases of patients who presented to the ED with severe low back pain refractory to traditional therapy, successfully treated using lumbar ESPB. Lumbar ESPB may be an effective approach to achieving rapid analgesia in patients who present with low back pain who may otherwise be poor candidates for more traditional therapy, such as with opioids or NSAIDs, or who may have refractory pain despite use of these medications.

Ultrasound-guided selective peripheral nerve block compared with the sub-dissociative dose of ketamine for analgesia in patients with extremity injuries.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the analgesic efficacy of ultrasound-guided selective peripheral nerve block (PNB) and sub-dissociative dose ketamine (SDK) for management of acute pain in patients with extremity injuries presenting to the emergency department (ED). METHODS: This prospective, open-label randomized clinical trial was conducted in the ED of a tertiary care Institute. The patients were provided with either ultrasound-guided selective PNB or SDK. The primary outcome was a reduction in pain in numerical rating scale (NRS) by at least 3 points without rescue analgesia. The secondary outcomes were the need for rescue analgesia, adverse events, and patient satisfaction on either arm. RESULTS: A total of 111 patients with isolated traumatic extremity injuries were included in the final analysis. The NRS score was significantly lower in the PNB group compared to the SDK group at 30, 60,120, 180-, and 240-min post-intervention [group ∼ time interaction, F (5, 647) = 21.53, p ≤ 0.001]. All the patients in the PNB group exhibited primary outcome (NRS ≥3 reductions) at 30 min post-intervention compared with 36 (65%) in the SDK group [-1.02(-1.422,0.622)]. Rescue analgesia was required in 10 (18%) patients in the SDK group compared to none in the PNB group [0.663(0.277,1.050)]. The decrease in NRS score from baseline at 30 min was significantly higher in PNB groups compared to the SDK group [-2.166(-2.640, -1.692)]. The most common side effect reported in the SDK group was dizziness 35(64%), followed by nausea 15(27%). None of the patients in the PNB group reported any complications. Patient satisfaction was higher in the PNB group than SDK group. CONCLUSION: The study provides evidence that ultrasound-guided PNB is superior to SDK in terms of its analgesic efficacy in the management of acute pain due to extremity injuries and is associated with higher patient satisfaction. The need for rescue analgesia was significantly less in the PNB group. SDK was associated with a high incidence of dizziness and nausea.

Effect of TENS on Vacuum Pain in Acute Soft Tissue Trauma.

BACKROUND: In the literature, the effect of TENS on acute pain has been investigated, and no study has been found on its effect on pain associated with VAC application. This randomized controlled trial was designed to assess the efficacy of TENS application in pain caused by vacuum applied in acute soft tissue trauma of the lower extremity. DESIGN AND SETTINGS: The study included 40 patients: 20 in the control group, and 20 in the experimental group and was carried out in a university hospital's plastic and reconstructive surgery clinic. Data for the study were gathered using the Patient Information form and the Pain Assessment form. Conventional TENS lasting 30 minutes was applied to the experimental group patients 1 hour before vacuum (vacuum assisted closure [VAC]) insertion and removal by the researcher, and TENS was not applied to the control group. The "Numerical Pain Scale" was used to assess pain in both groups before and after TENS application. In the statistical analysis of the data, the SPSS 23.0 package program was used. In all tests, p < .005 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: The experimental and control groups of the patients included in the study were homogeneous in terms of demographic characteristics (p > .05). Furthermore, when the pain levels of the groups were compared over time, it was discovered that the pain levels of the control group were significantly higher than the experimental group at the times of VAC insertion (T3) and VAC removal (T6) (p < .05). Bonferroni test, one of the post hoc tests, was used to determine in-group significance in both the experimental and control groups, and it was discovered that the difference was between T6 and all other times (T6-T1, T2, T3, T4, T5). CONCLUSIONS: The results obtained from our study showed that TENS reduced the pain caused by vacuum applied in acute soft tissue trauma of the lower extremity. It is thought that TENS may not replace traditional analgesics but may help reduce the level of pain and contribute to healing by increasing comfort during painful procedures.

Effectiveness of spontaneous pain coping strategies for acute pain management: A laboratory study.

The aim of the present study has been to analyze the relationship between the use of not previously trained, diverse acute pain coping strategies and levels of pain intensity and pain tolerance in a group of healthy participants. Previous research has analyzed the usefulness of the training of these strategies after several training sessions, but adequate patient training requires a great deal of time. Two hundred and forty healthy people participated in the study. Pain coping strategies was evaluated with a version of CSQ-S. Subsequently, the participants completed a cold pressor test and tolerance test. After that, subjects filled in the adaptation of the CSQ-S about the strategies which they had employed throughout the test. Correlation analyses showed a positive relationship between pain intensity and catastrophizing, distractor behaviors, hoping and ignoring the pain. Pain tolerance correlated with self-instructions, ignoring the pain, reinterpreting the pain, catastrophizing and faith and praying. Regression analyses showed that catastrophizing was found to be the strategy that most predicts the variance of pain intensity, and catastrophizing (negative) and ignoring the pain (positive) and praying (negative) were the most predictive ones for pain tolerance. This is the first laboratory study that identifies the more useful pain coping strategies which can be used by patients without previous training in an acute pain context. The results of this study could be useful in the development of protocols for nurses and other health professionals, especially for situations where potentially painful techniques are to be applied to patients.

The pathophysiology, assessment, and management of acute pain.

This article reviews the pathophysiology and treatment of acute pain. Two definitions of pain are considered, along with the International Association for the Study of Pain taxonomy for nociceptive, neuropathic and nociplastic pain. The mechanisms of acute and neuropathic pain are considered. Methods of assessment are discussed followed by the pharmacological management of both nociceptive and neuropathic pain.

Can subjective pain be inferred from objective physiological data? Evidence from patients with sickle cell disease.

Patients with sickle cell disease (SCD) experience lifelong struggles with both chronic and acute pain, often requiring medical interventMaion. Pain can be managed with medications, but dosages must balance the goal of pain mitigation against the risks of tolerance, addiction and other adverse effects. Setting appropriate dosages requires knowledge of a patient's subjective pain, but collecting pain reports from patients can be difficult for clinicians and disruptive for patients, and is only possible when patients are awake and communicative. Here we investigate methods for estimating SCD patients' pain levels indirectly using vital signs that are routinely collected and documented in medical records. Using machine learning, we develop both sequential and non-sequential probabilistic models that can be used to infer pain levels or changes in pain from sequences of these physiological measures. We demonstrate that these models outperform null models and that objective physiological data can be used to inform estimates for subjective pain.