Influence of Family-Learned Fear-of-Pain on Patients.

BACKGROUND: Fear-of-pain is a common feeling of patients and their family who experience or witness severe or chronic pain. Fear-of-pain may disturb patient's recovery, and also influence family support to assist patients' recovery. AIM: This study is to measure the level of family support for each patient; evaluate the extent of the supporting families' fear-of-pain; and identify possible interventions in family support and family fear-of-pain. METHODS: This cross-sectional descriptive research involved 77 participants in the orthopedics department of a tertiary hospital by convenience sampling. The online questionnaire includes general information, and scales of fear-of-pain, pain anxiety, pain vigilance and awareness, pain catastrophizing, and family support. T-test, Pearson correlation analysis and Spearman correlation analysis were used to analyze data. RESULTS: Most participants reported that they experienced a moderate-to-high level of fear-of-pain, pain anxiety, pain vigilance and awareness. A total of 15.6% of participants are at risk of pain catastrophizing. The family's pain vigilance and awareness, and fear-of-pain were often similar to those of the patient, and their levels of pain anxiety and catastrophizing were often higher than the patient's. Family support and families' fear-of-pain affect patients' feelings of pain and families' behavior in decision-making for patient recovery, necessitating the development of interventions for patients' families. CONCLUSIONS: Family members can develop the fear-of-pain from witnessing painful experiences and may exhibit fear-avoidance behaviors in deciding on patients' rehabilitation plan. Family support, including the type of relationship with families, and length of time family spent with the patient, had an effect on patients' pain and fear-of-pain.

CT ventilation image-guided helical Tomotherapy at sparing functional lungs for locally advanced lung cancer: analysis of dose-function metrics and the impact on pulmonary toxicity.

PURPOSE: CT ventilation image (CTVI)-guided radiotherapy that selectively avoids irradiating highly-functional lung regions has potential to reduce pulmonary toxicity. Considering Helical TomoTherapy (HT) has higher modulation capabilities, we investigated the capability and characteristic of HT at sparing functional lungs for locally advanced lung cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Pretreatment 4DCT scans were carried out for 17 patients. Local lung volume expansion (or contraction) during inspiration is related to the volume change at a given lung voxel and is used as a surrogate for ventilation. The ventilation maps were generated from two sets of CT images (peak-exhale and peak-inhale) by deformable registration and a Jacobian-based algorithm. Each ventilation map was normalized to percentile images. Six plans were designed for each patient: one anatomical plan without ventilation map and five functional plans incorporating ventilation map which designed to spare varying degrees of high-functional lungs that were defined as the top 10%, 20%, 30%, 40%, and 50% of the percentile ventilation ranges, respectively. The dosimetric and evaluation factors were recorded regarding planning target volume (PTV) and other organs at risk (OARs), with particular attention to the dose delivered to total lung and functional lungs. An established dose-function-based normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) model was used to estimate risk of radiation pneumonitis (RP) for each scenario. RESULTS: Patients were divided into a benefit group (8 patients) and a non-benefit group (9 patients) based on whether the RP-risk of functional plan was lower than that of anatomical plan. The distance between high-ventilated region and PTV, as well as tumor volume had significant differences between the two groups (P < 0.05). For patients in the benefit group, the mean value of fV5, fV10, fV20, and fMLD (functional V5, V10, V20, and mean lung dose, respectively) were significantly lower starting from top 30% functional plan than in anatomical plan (P < 0.05). With expand of avoidance region in functional plans, the dose coverage of PTV is not sacrificed (P > 0.05) but at the cost of increased dose received by OARs. CONCLUSION: Ventilation image-guided HT plans can reduce the dose received by highly-functional lung regions with a range up to top 50% ventilated area. The spatial distribution of ventilation and tumor size were critical factors to better select patients who could benefit from the functional plan.