Discordance between pain specialists and patients on the perception of dependence on pain medication: A multi-centre cross-sectional study.

AIM: Patients with chronic non-cancer pain are referred to pain centres to improve their pain treatment. The discontinuation of pain medications in case of poor efficacy can be difficult to accept for patients, particularly opioid analgesics. Previous research has described that from the patients' perspective, the psychological relief of a negative effect of chronic pain and withdrawal symptoms of prescription opioids represent drivers of persistent use and first stage of opioid use disorder, despite insufficient pain relief. There is no validated tool to investigate this psychological dependence. This study aimed to assess discordance between patients and pain specialists in their perception of dependence on pain medication and investigate associations with characteristics of patients, type of pain and iatrogenic pharmacodependence. METHODS: Self-administered questionnaires (patients and physicians) were administered in six pain centres in France. A question on perceived dependence on pain medications was addressed to the patient and the physician in a matched pair. Discordance between them was evaluated by the Cohen kappa coefficient. Demographics, pain, anxiety and depression, pain medication withdrawal symptoms, diverted use, and craving represented variables studied in a multivariate model as potentially associated with patient-physician discordance. RESULTS: According to the 212 pairs of completed questionnaires, a perceived dependence was reported by the majority of patients (65.6%) and physicians (68.4%). However, the concordance was fair (kappa=0.38; CI [95%]: 0.25-0.51). Almost all patients (89.3%) were treated with an opioid analgesic. A higher likelihood of discordance was observed when patients suffered from nociplastic pain (odds ratio [OR]: 2.72, 95% [CI]: 1.29-5.84). CONCLUSION: Medical shared-decision for changing pain treatment could be improved by taking into account the perception of patient dependence on medications for pain relief and or psychoactive effects, particularly in nociplastic pain for which the treatment is challenging.

Combining Awake Anesthesia with Minimal Invasive Surgery Optimizes Intraoperative Surgical Spinal Cord Stimulation Lead Placement.

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an effective and validated treatment to address chronic refractory neuropathic pain in persistent spinal pain syndrome-type 2 (PSPS-T2) patients. Surgical SCS lead placement is traditionally performed under general anesthesia due to its invasiveness. In parallel, recent works have suggested that awake anesthesia (AA), consisting of target controlled intra-venous anesthesia (TCIVA), could be an interesting tool to optimize lead anatomical placement using patient intra-operative feedback. We hypothesized that combining AA with minimal invasive surgery (MIS) could improve SCS outcomes. The goal of this study was to evaluate SCS lead performance (defined by the area of pain adequately covered by paraesthesia generated via SCS), using an intraoperative objective quantitative mapping tool, and secondarily, to assess pain relief, functional improvement and change in quality of life with a composite score. We analyzed data from a prospective multicenter study (ESTIMET) to compare the outcomes of 115 patients implanted with MIS under AA (MISAA group) or general anesthesia (MISGA group), or by laminectomy under general anesthesia (LGA group). All in all, awake surgery appears to show significantly better performance than general anesthesia in terms of patient pain coverage (65% vs. 34-62%), pain surface (50-76% vs. 50-61%) and pain intensity (65% vs. 35-40%), as well as improved secondary outcomes (quality of life, functional disability and depression). One step further, our results suggest that MISAA combined with intra-operative hypnosis could potentialize patient intraoperative cooperation and could be proposed as a personalized package offered to PSPS-T2 patients eligible for SCS implantation in highly dedicated neuromodulation centers.

The Added Value of Intraoperative Hypnosis during Spinal Cord Stimulation Lead Implantation under Awake Anesthesia in Patients Presenting with Refractory Chronic Pain.

To improve pain relief for refractory pain condition, spinal cord stimulation (SCS) needs to target the dedicated neuronal fibers within the dorsal columns. Intraoperative feedback from the patient can optimize lead placement but requires "awake surgery", allowing interaction between patient and surgeon. This can produce negative effects like anxiety and stress. To better manage these aspects, we propose to combine intraoperative hypnosis with awake anesthesia. Seventy-four patients (35 females, 22-80 years) presenting with chronic refractory pain, were offered intraoperative hypnosis during awake SCS lead implantation. Interactive conversational hypnosis was used as well as interactive touch, which was enhanced during painful moments during the lead intraoperative programming. All patients participated actively during the intraoperative testing which helped to optimize the lead positioning. They kept an extremely positive memory of the surgery and of the hypnotic experience, despite some painful moments. Pain could be reduced in these patients by using interactions and touch, which works on Gate Control modulation. Positive memory was reinforced by congratulations to create self-confidence and to induce positive expectations, which could reinforce the Diffuse Noxious Inhibitory Controls at the spinal level. Cooperation was improved because the patient was actively participating and thus, much more alert when feedback was required. Combining intraoperative hypnosis with awake anesthesia appears helpful for SCS lead implantation. It enhances patient cooperation, allows optimization of lead positioning, and leads to better pain control, positive and resourceful memory.

Hypnosis to manage musculoskeletal and neuropathic chronic pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to identify and quantify the current available evidence of hypnosis efficacy to manage pain in patients with chronic musculoskeletal and neuropathic pain. Randomized Control Trials (RCTs) with hypnosis and/or self-hypnosis treatment used to manage musculoskeletal and/or neuropathic chronic pain in adults and assessing pain intensity were included. Reviews, meta-analyses, non-randomized clinical trials, case reports and meeting abstracts were excluded. Five databases, up until May 13th 2021, were used to search for RCTs using hypnosis to manage chronic musculoskeletal and/or neuropathic pain. The protocol is registered on PROSPERO register (CRD42020180298) and no specific funding was received for this review. The risk of bias asessement was conducted according to the revised Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized control trials (RoB 2.0). Nine eligible RCTs including a total of 530 participants were considered. The main analyses showed a moderate decrease in pain intensity (Hedge's g: -0.42; p = 0.025 after intervention, Hedge's g: -0.37; p = 0.027 after short-term follow-up) and pain interference (Hedge's g: -0.39; p = 0.029) following hypnosis compared to control interventions. A significant moderate to large effect size of hypnosis compared to controls was found for at 8 sessions or more (Hedge's g: -0.555; p = 0.034), compared to a small and not statistically significant effect for fewer than 8 sessions (Hedge's g: -0.299; p = 0.19). These findings suggest that a hypnosis treatment lasting a minimum of 8 sessions could offer an effective complementary approach to manage chronic musculoskeletal and neuropathic pain. Future research is needed to delineate the relevance of hypnosis in practice and its most efficient prescription.

The Challenge of Converting "Failed Spinal Cord Stimulation Syndrome" Back to Clinical Success, Using SCS Reprogramming as Salvage Therapy, through Neurostimulation Adapters Combined with 3D-Computerized Pain Mapping Assessment: A Real Life Retrospective Study.

While paresthesia-based Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) has been proven effective as treatment for chronic neuropathic pain, its initial benefits may lead to the development of "Failed SCS Syndrome' (FSCSS) defined as decrease over time related to Loss of Efficacy (LoE) with or without Loss of Coverage (LoC). Development of technologies associating new paresthesia-free stimulation waveforms and implanted pulse generator adapters provide opportunities to manage patients with LoE. The main goal of our study was to investigate salvage procedures, through neurostimulation adapters, in patients already implanted with SCS and experiencing LoE. We retrospectively analyzed a cohort of patients who were offered new SCS programs/waveforms through an implanted adapter between 2018 and 2021. Patients were evaluated before and at 1-, 3-, 6- and 12-month follow-ups. Outcomes included pain intensity rating with a Visual Analog Scale (VAS), pain/coverage mappings and stimulation preferences. Last follow-up evaluations (N = 27) showed significant improvement in VAS (p = 0.0001), ODI (p = 0.021) and quality of life (p = 0.023). In the 11/27 patients with LoC, SCS efficacy on pain intensity (36.89%) was accompanied via paresthesia coverage recovery (55.57%) and pain surface decrease (47.01%). At 12-month follow-up, 81.3% preferred to keep tonic stimulation in their waveform portfolio. SCS conversion using adapters appears promising as a salvage solution, with an emphasis on paresthesia recapturing enabled via spatial retargeting. In light of these results, adapters could be integrated in SCS rescue algorithms or should be considered in SCS rescue.

Long-Term Efficacy of a Home-Care Hypnosis Program in Elderly Persons Suffering From Chronic Pain: A 12-Month Follow-Up.

BACKGROUND: Pain is a major public health concern in the aging population. However, medication brings about negative effects that compel healthcare professionals to seek alternative management techniques to alleviate pain. Hypnosis has been recognized as an effective technique to manage pain, but its long-term efficacy has yet to be examined in older adults. AIMS: The aim was to assess the effectiveness, over a 12-month period, of home-care hypnosis in elderly participants suffering from chronic pain. DESIGN: Real-life retrospective one-arm study with a 12-month follow-up. SETTINGS: Elderly Persons Suffering From Chronic Pain enrolled in a clinical health care program that offered home medical follow-up. PARTICIPANTS/SUBJECTS: Fourteen elderly women (mean age 81 years) with chronic pain participated in the home-care hypnosis program. All participants presented chronic pain (≥6 months) with average pain score >4/10. METHODS: Participants took part in seven 15-minute hypnosis sessions within 12 months. The Brief Pain Inventory questionnaire was used to evaluate pain perception and pain interference at baseline and at 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up period. RESULTS: Hypnosis home-care program significantly decreased pain perception and pain interference compared to baseline after 3 months (-29% and -40%, p < .001), and remained lower at 6 (-31% and -54%, p < .001) and 12 (-31% and -47%, p < .001) months. CONCLUSIONS: Seven sessions of 15 minutes allocated throughout a 12-month period produced clinically significant decreases in pain perception and pain interference. Hypnosis could be considered as an optimal additional way for health practitioners to manage chronic pain in an elderly population with long-term efficacy. This study offers a new long-term option to improve chronic pain management at home in elderly populations through a low-cost nonpharmacological intervention.

A Novel Multi-Dimensional Clinical Response Index Dedicated to Improving Global Assessment of Pain in Patients with Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome after Spinal Surgery, Based on a Real-Life Prospective Multicentric Study (PREDIBACK) and Machine Learning Techniques.

The multidimensionality of chronic pain forces us to look beyond isolated assessment such as pain intensity, which does not consider multiple key parameters, particularly in post-operative Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome (PSPS-T2) patients. Our ambition was to produce a novel Multi-dimensional Clinical Response Index (MCRI), including not only pain intensity but also functional capacity, anxiety-depression, quality of life and quantitative pain mapping, the objective being to achieve instantaneous assessment using machine learning techniques. Two hundred PSPS-T2 patients were enrolled in the real-life observational prospective PREDIBACK study with 12-month follow-up and received various treatments. From a multitude of questionnaires/scores, specific items were combined, as exploratory factor analyses helped to create a single composite MCRI; using pairwise correlations between measurements, it appeared to more accurately represent all pain dimensions than any previous classical score. It represented the best compromise among all existing indexes, showing the highest sensitivity/specificity related to Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC). Novel composite indexes could help to refine pain assessment by informing the physician's perception of patient condition on the basis of objective and holistic metrics, and also by providing new insights regarding therapy efficacy/patient outcome assessments, before ultimately being adapted to other pathologies.

The Added Value of Subcutaneous Peripheral Nerve Field Stimulation Combined with SCS, as Salvage Therapy, for Refractory Low Back Pain Component in Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome Implanted Patients: A Randomized Controlled Study (CUMPNS Study) Based on 3D-Mapping Composite Pain Assessment.

While Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) provides satisfaction to almost 2/3 of Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome-Type 2 (PSPS-T2) patients implanted for refractory chronic back and/or leg pain, when not adequately addressed the back pain component, leaves patients in a therapeutic cul-de-sac. Peripheral Nerve field Stimulation (PNfS) has shown interesting results addressing back pain in the same population. Far from placing these two techniques in opposition, we suggest that these approaches could be combined to better treat PSPS-T2 patients. We designed a RCT (CUMPNS), with a 12-month follow-up, to assess the potential added value of PNfS, as a salvage therapy, in PSPS-T2 patients experiencing a "Failed SCS Syndrome" in the back pain component. Fourteen patients were included in this study and randomized into 2 groups ("SCS + PNfS" group/n = 6 vs. "SCS only" group/n = 8). The primary objective of the study was to compare the percentage of back pain surface decrease after 3 months, using a computerized interface to obtain quantitative pain mappings, combined with multi-dimensional SCS outcomes. Back pain surface decreased significantly greater for the "SCS + PNfS" group (80.2% ± 21.3%) compared to the "SCS only" group (13.2% ± 94.8%) (p = 0.012), highlighting the clinical interest of SCS + PNfS, in cases where SCS fails to address back pain.

Finite Mixture Models Based on Pain Intensity, Functional Disability and Psychological Distress Composite Assessment Allow Identification of Two Distinct Classes of Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome after Surgery Patients Related to Their Quality of Life.

Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome Type 2 (PSPS-T2), (Failed Back Surgery Syndrome), dramatically impacts on patient quality of life, as evidenced by Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) assessment tools. However, the importance of functioning, pain perception and psychological status in HRQoL can substantially vary between subjects. Our goal was to extract patient profiles based on HRQoL dimensions in a sample of PSPS-T2 patients and to identify factors associated with these profiles. Two classes were clearly identified using a mixture of mixed effect models from a clinical data set of 200 patients enrolled in "PREDIBACK", a multicenter observational prospective study including PSPS-T2 patients with one-year follow-up. We observed that HRQoL was more impacted by functional disability for first class patients (n = 136), and by pain perception for second class patients (n = 62). Males that perceive their work as physical were more impacted by disability than pain intensity. Lower education level, lack of adaptive coping strategies and higher pain intensity were significantly associated with HRQoL being more impacted by pain perception. The identification of such classes allows for a better understanding of HRQoL dimensions and opens the gate towards optimized health-related quality of life evaluation and personalized pain management.

Machine Learning Algorithms Provide Greater Prediction of Response to SCS Than Lead Screening Trial: A Predictive AI-Based Multicenter Study.

Persistent pain after spinal surgery can be successfully addressed by spinal cord stimulation (SCS). International guidelines strongly recommend that a lead trial be performed before any permanent implantation. Recent clinical data highlight some major limitations of this approach. First, it appears that patient outco mes, with or without lead trial, are similar. In contrast, during trialing, infection rate drops drastically within time and can compromise the therapy. Using composite pain assessment experience and previous research, we hypothesized that machine learning models could be robust screening tools and reliable predictors of long-term SCS efficacy. We developed several algorithms including logistic regression, regularized logistic regression (RLR), naive Bayes classifier, artificial neural networks, random forest and gradient-boosted trees to test this hypothesis and to perform internal and external validations, the objective being to confront model predictions with lead trial results using a 1-year composite outcome from 103 patients. While almost all models have demonstrated superiority on lead trialing, the RLR model appears to represent the best compromise between complexity and interpretability in the prediction of SCS efficacy. These results underscore the need to use AI-based predictive medicine, as a synergistic mathematical approach, aimed at helping implanters to optimize their clinical choices on daily practice.

Early Hypnotic Intervention After Traumatic Events in Children.

Post-traumatic stress disorder is a debilitating condition that can develop after exposure to any potentially traumatic event (natural disaster, physical assault, and car accident). This study focused on four pediatric patients presenting with an early stress response after a motor vehicle accident who were offered early therapeutic and a preventive management by hypnotherapy shortly after exposure to the traumatic event. All patients improved after one or several sessions of hypnosis. The results indicate that hypnotherapy can immediately help patients during the early period following a traumatic event.

Hypnosis Program Effectiveness in a 12-week Home Care Intervention To Manage Chronic Pain in Elderly Women: A Pilot Trial.

PURPOSE: As the prevalence of pain increases with age, taking too much medication can lead to negative side effects in elderly patients. While evidence in the literature has shown that clinical hypnosis is effective in an adult population, there are few studies in an aging population and efficacy has never been established in a home care setting. The goal of this study was to determine the effects of a hypnosis program delivered during home care interventions in elderly women during a 12-week period. METHODS: This pilot trial took place from April 2016 to October 2017 at Limoges, France. Fifteen elderly women with chronic pain participated (81 (65-87) years old). All participants presented chronic pain for more than 6 months (inclusion criteria: average pain score >4/10). Participants took part in three 15-min hypnosis sessions separated by four to six weeks. Each hypnosis session was personalized and carried out with induction, pain perception alteration, and post-hypnotic suggestions. Pain perception and pain interference were evaluated with the Brief Pain Inventory questionnaire, and compared between before and after the 12-week hypnosis program. FINDINGS: Hypnosis home care program significantly improved scores on worst (8.9 to 6.7, P < 0.001), average (6.8 to 5.1, P < 0.001), and current pain perception (6.5 to 3.9, P < 0.001), pain interference with physical activity (P < 0.001) and with socio-affective factors (P < 0.01). IMPLICATIONS: Taken together, these findings show that a hypnosis intervention is feasible and effective to manage pain in an elderly population.

Pharmacological interventions for chronic pain in children: an overview of systematic reviews.

We know little about the safety or efficacy of pharmacological medicines for children and adolescents with chronic pain, despite their common use. Our aim was to conduct an overview review of systematic reviews of pharmacological interventions that purport to reduce pain in children with chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) or chronic cancer-related pain (CCRP). We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Medline, EMBASE, and DARE for systematic reviews from inception to March 2018. We conducted reference and citation searches of included reviews. We included children (0-18 years of age) with CNCP or CCRP. We extracted the review characteristics and primary outcomes of ≥30% participant-reported pain relief and patient global impression of change. We sifted 704 abstracts and included 23 systematic reviews investigating children with CNCP or CCRP. Seven of those 23 reviews included 6 trials that involved children with CNCP. There were no randomised controlled trials in reviews relating to reducing pain in CCRP. We were unable to combine data in a meta-analysis. Overall, the quality of evidence was very low, and we have very little confidence in the effect estimates. The state of evidence of randomized controlled trials in this field is poor; we have no evidence from randomised controlled trials for pharmacological interventions in children with cancer-related pain, yet cannot deny individual children access to potential pain relief. Prospero ID: CRD42018086900.

Reiki therapy for pain, anxiety and quality of life.

The use of complementary and alternative therapies is growing year after year, and Reiki therapy takes a place of choice. Reiki therapy, classed as a biofield energy therapy, raises the question of validity when applied to patients, especially in palliative care. The purpose of this review is to highlight the effects of Reiki therapy on pain, anxiety/depression and quality of life of patients, specifically in palliative care. The current article indicates that Reiki therapy is useful for relieving pain, decreasing anxiety/depression and improving quality of life in several conditions. Due to the small number of studies in palliative care, we were unable to clearly identify the benefits of Reiki therapy, but preliminary results tend to show some positive effects of Reiki therapy for the end-of-life population. These results should encourage teams working in palliative care to conduct more studies to determine the benefits of Reiki therapy on pain, anxiety/depression and quality of life in palliative care.

Antidepressants for chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents.

BACKGROUND: Pain is a common feature of childhood and adolescence around the world, and for many young people, that pain is chronic. The World Health Organization guidelines for pharmacological treatments for children's persisting pain acknowledge that pain in children is a major public health concern of high significance in most parts of the world. While in the past pain was largely dismissed and was frequently left untreated, views on children's pain have changed over time and relief of pain is now seen as important.We designed a suite of seven reviews on chronic non-cancer pain and cancer pain (looking at antidepressants, antiepileptic drugs, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, opioids, and paracetamol) in order to review the evidence for children's pain utilising pharmacological interventions.As the leading cause of morbidity in the world today, chronic disease (and its associated pain) is a major health concern. Chronic pain (that is pain lasting three months or longer) can arise in the paediatric population in a variety of pathophysiological classifications (nociceptive, neuropathic, or idiopathic) from genetic conditions, nerve damage pain, chronic musculoskeletal pain, and chronic abdominal pain, as well as for other unknown reasons.Antidepressants have been used in adults for pain relief and pain management since the 1970s. The clinical impression from extended use over many years is that antidepressants are useful for some neuropathic pain symptoms, and that effects on pain relief are divorced and different from effects on depression; for example, the effects of tricyclic antidepressants on pain may occur at different, and often lower, doses than those on depression. Amitriptyline is one of the most commonly used drugs for treating neuropathic pain in the UK. OBJECTIVES: To assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse events of antidepressants used to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents aged between birth and 17 years, in any setting. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) via the Cochrane Register of Studies Online, MEDLINE via Ovid, and Embase via Ovid from inception to 6 September 2016. We also searched the reference lists of retrieved studies and reviews, and searched online clinical trial registries. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials, with or without blinding, of any dose and any route, treating chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents, comparing any antidepressant with placebo or an active comparator. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed studies for eligibility. We planned to use dichotomous data to calculate risk ratio and number needed to treat for one additional event, using standard methods. We assessed the evidence using GRADE and created three 'Summary of findings' tables. MAIN RESULTS: We included four studies with a total of 272 participants (6 to 18 years of age) who had either chronic neuropathic pain, complex regional pain syndrome type 1, irritable bowel syndrome, functional abdominal pain, or functional dyspepsia. All of the studies were small. One study investigated amitriptyline versus gabapentin (34 participants), two studies investigated amitriptyline versus placebo (123 participants), and one study investigated citalopram versus placebo (115 participants). Due to a lack of available data we were unable to complete any quantitative analysis.Risk of bias for the four included studies varied, due to issues with randomisation and allocation concealment (low to unclear risk); blinding of participants, personnel, and outcome assessors (low to unclear risk); reporting of results (low to unclear risk); and size of the study populations (high risk). We judged the remaining domains, attrition and other potential sources of bias, as low risk of bias. Primary outcomesNo studies reported our primary outcomes of participant-reported pain relief of 30% or greater or 50% or greater (very low-quality evidence).No studies reported on Patient Global Impression of Change (very low-quality evidence).We rated the overall quality of the evidence (GRADE rating) as very low. We downgraded the quality of the evidence by three levels to very low because there was no evidence to support or refute. Secondary outcomesAll studies measured adverse events, with very few reported (11 out of 272 participants). All but one adverse event occurred in the active treatment groups (amitriptyline, citalopram, and gabapentin). Adverse events in all studies, across active treatment and comparator groups, were considered to be a mild reaction, such as nausea, dizziness, drowsiness, tiredness, and abdominal discomfort (very low-quality evidence).There were also very few withdrawals due to adverse events, again all but one from the active treatment groups (very low-quality evidence).No serious adverse events were reported across any of the studies (very low-quality evidence).There were few or no data for our remaining secondary outcomes (very low-quality evidence).We rated the overall quality of the evidence (GRADE rating) for these secondary outcomes as very low. We downgraded the quality of the evidence by three levels to very low due to too few data and the fact that the number of events was too small to be meaningful. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We identified only a small number of studies with small numbers of participants and insufficient data for analysis.As we could undertake no meta-analysis, we are unable to comment about efficacy or harm from the use of antidepressants to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents. Similarly, we cannot comment on our remaining secondary outcomes: Carer Global Impression of Change; requirement for rescue analgesia; sleep duration and quality; acceptability of treatment; physical functioning; and quality of life.There is evidence from adult randomised controlled trials that some antidepressants, such as amitriptyline, can provide some pain relief in certain chronic non-cancer pain conditions.There is no evidence from randomised controlled trials to support or refute the use of antidepressants to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children or adolescents.

Antiepileptic drugs for chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents.

BACKGROUND: Pain is a common feature of childhood and adolescence around the world, and for many young people, that pain is chronic. The World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines for pharmacological treatments for children's persisting pain acknowledge that pain in children is a major public health concern of high significance in most parts of the world. While in the past, pain was largely dismissed and was frequently left untreated, views on children's pain have changed over time, and relief of pain is now seen as importantWe designed a suite of seven reviews on chronic non-cancer pain and cancer pain (looking at antidepressants, antiepileptic drugs, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, opioids, and paracetamol) in order to review the evidence for children's pain utilising pharmacological interventions in children and adolescents.As the leading cause of morbidity in the world today, chronic disease (and its associated pain) is a major health concern. Chronic pain (that is pain lasting three months or longer) can occur in the paediatric population in a variety of pathophysiological classifications (nociceptive, neuropathic, or idiopathic) relating to genetic conditions, nerve damage pain, chronic musculoskeletal pain, and chronic abdominal pain, and for other unknown reasons.Antiepileptic (anticonvulsant) drugs, which were originally developed to treat convulsions in people with epilepsy, have in recent years been used to provide pain relief in adults for many chronic painful conditions and are now recommended for the treatment of chronic pain in the WHO list of essential medicines. Known side effects of antiepileptic drugs range from sweating, headache, elevated temperature, nausea, and abdominal pain to more serious effects including mental or motor function impairment. OBJECTIVES: To assess the analgesic efficacy and adverse events of antiepileptic drugs used to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents aged between birth and 17 years, in any setting. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) via the Cochrane Register of Studies Online, MEDLINE via Ovid, and Embase via Ovid from inception to 6 September 2016. We also searched the reference lists of retrieved studies and reviews as well as online clinical trial registries. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials, with or without blinding, by any route, treating chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents, comparing any antiepileptic drug with placebo or an active comparator. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed studies for eligibility. We planned to use dichotomous data to calculate risk ratio and number needed to treat for one additional event, using standard methods if data were available. We assessed the evidence using GRADE and created two 'Summary of findings' tables. MAIN RESULTS: We included two studies with a total of 141 participants (aged 7 to 18 years) with chronic neuropathic pain, complex regional pain syndrome type 1 (CRPS-I), or fibromyalgia. One study investigated pregabalin versus placebo in participants with fibromyalgia (107 participants), and the other study investigated gabapentin versus amitriptyline in participants with CRPS-I or neuropathic pain (34 participants). We were unable to perform any quantitative analysis.Risk of bias for the two included studies varied, due to issues with randomisation (low to unclear risk), blinding of outcome assessors (low to unclear risk), reporting bias (low to unclear risk), the size of the study populations (high risk), and industry funding in the 'other' domain (low to unclear risk). We judged the remaining domains of sequence generation, blinding of participants and personnel, and attrition as low risk of bias. Primary outcomesOne study (gabapentin 900 mg/day versus amitriptyline 10 mg/day, 34 participants, for 6 weeks) did not report our primary outcomes (very low-quality evidence).The second study (pregabalin 75 to 450 mg/day versus placebo 75 to 450 mg/day, 107 participants, for 15 weeks) reported no significant change in pain scores for pain relief of 30% or greater between pregabalin 18/54 (33.3%), and placebo 16/51 (31.4%), P = 0.83 (very low-quality evidence). This study also reported Patient Global Impression of Change, with the percentage of participants feeling "much or very much improved" with pregabalin 53.1%, and placebo 29.5% (very low-quality evidence).We downgraded the evidence by three levels to very low for one of two reasons: due to the fact that there was no evidence to support or refute the use of the intervention, or that there were too few data and the number of events was too small to be meaningful. Secondary outcomesIn one small study, adverse events were uncommon: gabapentin 2 participants (2 adverse events); amitriptyline 1 participant (1 adverse event) (6-week trial). The second study reported a higher number of adverse events: pregabalin 38 participants (167 adverse events); placebo 34 participants (132 adverse events) (15-week trial) (very low-quality evidence).Withdrawals due to adverse events were infrequent in both studies: pregabalin (4 participants), placebo (4 participants), gabapentin (2 participants), and amitriptyline (1 participant) (very low-quality evidence).Serious adverse events were reported in both studies. One study reported only one serious adverse event (cholelithiasis and major depression resulting in hospitalisation in the pregabalin group) and the other study reported no serious adverse events (very low-quality evidence).There were few or no data for our remaining secondary outcomes (very low-quality evidence).We downgraded the evidence by three levels to very low due to too few data and the fact that the number of events was too small to be meaningful. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review identified only two small studies, with insufficient data for analysis.As we could undertake no meta-analysis, we were unable to comment about efficacy or harm from the use of antiepileptic drugs to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents. Similarly, we could not comment on our remaining secondary outcomes: Carer Global Impression of Change; requirement for rescue analgesia; sleep duration and quality; acceptability of treatment; physical functioning; and quality of life.We know from adult randomised controlled trials that some antiepileptics, such as gabapentin and pregabalin, can be effective in certain chronic pain conditions.We found no evidence to support or refute the use of antiepileptic drugs to treat chronic non-cancer pain in children and adolescents.

[New analgesics in paediatrics]. / Actualités des antalgiques en pédiatrie.

There are a number of different types of analgesics in paediatrics. They must be used in accordance with the situation, the type of pain and the characteristics of the child. In all cases, strict compliance with the posology and the instructions for use is essential to avoid any risk of error. Finally, pharmacological, physical and psychological treatments are employed in a complementary manner, for the biopsychosocial management of the child's care.

[Chronic pain in children]. / La douleur chronique de L'Enfant.

Chronic pain affects 10 to 20% of children and teenagers. Apart from the physical consequences, it leads to psychological and social difficulties. These notions, still not well known, are often overlooked. It is essential to raise the awareness of professionals in order to identify these young patients as early as possible and offer them adapted multimodal treatment. The main aim is to develop their autonomy to enable them to gain better understanding of this pain and to treat the cause when it can be identified.