Acute pain: effective management requires comprehensive assessment.

Pain is among the most common reasons that patients seek medical care, and inadequate assessment may result in suboptimal management. Acute pain in response to trauma or surgery can be complex, variable, and dynamic, but its assessment is often simplistic and brief. One-dimensional rating scale measures of pain severity facilitate rapid evaluation and often form the basis of treatment algorithms. However, additional features of pain should inform the selection of a treatment regimen, and can include pain qualities, duration, impact on functional capabilities, and underlying cause. Patient age, sex, psychosocial features, and comorbid conditions are also important features to consider. Use of a multidimensional tool is recommended for assessing many of these features if time permits. Additionally, clinicians often fail to recognize or consider the potentially detrimental long-term effects of acute pain. As the United States continues to experience a prescription drug crisis, a "universal precautions" approach including abuse risk assessment and abuse deterrence strategies should be implemented for patients receiving opioids. Increased efforts and research are necessary to enhance the utility of available acute pain assessment tools. Developing more comprehensive tools for patient assessment is the first step in achieving the ultimate goal of effective acute pain management. The objectives of this review are to summarize issues regarding the complexity of acute pain and to provide suggestions for its evaluation.

Guidelines for the management of breakthrough pain in patients with cancer.

The moral imperative to adequately manage pain is being increasingly recognized worldwide. A comprehensive pain management approach that addresses the various presentations of pain in patients with cancer is required, including appropriate management of breakthrough pain. Breakthrough pain commonly occurs in patients with advanced cancer and is disabling to the individual and burdensome to society, yet it is often inadequately managed. Because pain is heterogeneous, the best management of an individual's pain, including breakthrough pain in cancer, requires a thorough assessment to tailor the treatment strategies. Recently developed guidelines support this approach and recommend treating breakthrough pain using rapid- or short-acting opioids with pharmacodynamics that mirror the rapid onset and short duration of the presenting pain. This approach should be part of a comprehensive strategy to treat pain within the context of the primary disease trajectory, offering continuity of care and access to specialized palliative care when appropriate.

Polyanalgesic Consensus Conference--2012: recommendations on trialing for intrathecal (intraspinal) drug delivery: report of an interdisciplinary expert panel.

INTRODUCTION: Trialing for intrathecal pump placement is an essential part of the decision-making process in placing a permanent device. In both the United States and the international community, the proper method for trialing is ill defined. METHODS: The Polyanalgesic Consensus Conference (PACC) is a group of well-published experienced practitioners who meet to update the state of care for intrathecal therapies on the basis of current knowledge in the literature and clinical experience. Anexhaustive search is performed to create a base of information that the panel considers when making recommendations for best clinical practices. This literature, coupled with clinical experience, is the basis for recommendations and for identification of gaps in the base of knowledge regarding trialing for intrathecal pump placement. RESULTS: The panel has made recommendations for the proper methods of trialing for long-term intrathecal drug delivery. CONCLUSION: The use of intrathecal drug delivery is an important part of the treatment algorithm for moderate to severe chronic pain. It has become common practice to perform a temporary neuroaxial infusion before permanent device implantation. On the basis of current knowledge, the PACC has developed recommendations to improve care. The need to update these recommendations will be very important as new literature is published.

Anesthetic Routines: The Anesthesiologist's Role in GI Recovery and Postoperative Ileus.

All patients undergoing bowel resection experience postoperative ileus, a transient cessation of bowel motility that prevents effective transit of intestinal contents or tolerance of oral intake, to varying degrees. An anesthesiologist plays a critical role, not only in the initiation of surgical anesthesia, but also with the selection and transition to effective postoperative analgesia regimens. Attempts to reduce the duration of postoperative ileus have prompted the study of various preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative regimens to facilitate gastrointestinal recovery. These include modifiable variables such as epidural anesthesia and analgesia, opioid-sparing anesthesia and analgesia, fluid restriction, colloid versus crystalloid combinations, prokinetic drugs, and use of the new peripherally acting mu-opioid receptor (PAM-OR) antagonists. Review and appropriate adaptation of these multiple modifiable interventions by anesthesiologists and their surgical colleagues will facilitate implementation of a best-practice management routine for bowel resection procedures that will benefit the patient and the healthcare system.

Current status and evolving role of abuse-deterrent opioids in managing patients with chronic pain.

Opioids are widely used for the treatment of patients with chronic pain; yet, the increase in their abuse, misuse, and diversion is an ongoing focus of regulatory, governmental, and legal scrutiny. As a consequence, clinicians are faced with numerous challenges in an effort to use opioids in appropriate patients with pain while minimizing the potential for opioid abuse, misuse, and diversion. Policies and programs such as state prescription monitoring programs, which have been in existence for decades, are but one attempt to address some of the issues regarding the prescribing of opioids. Another is a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy for opioids under consideration by the US Food and Drug Administration. At the clinical level, a universal precautions and risk management package that includes risk assessment and patient monitoring is a recommended approach. This approach can also include the use of abuse-deterrent and abuse-resistant formulations designed to reduce the nonmedical use of opioids. Several of these opioid formulations have been approved or should soon be on the market for use in the United States; however, their role and other questions regarding their use remain unanswered. The authors offer their clinical perspective on several of these key questions.

Intrathecal therapy for cancer and non-cancer pain.

BACKGROUND: Intrathecal drug infusion therapy is usually considered when spinal-acting analgesics or antispasmodics administered via the oral or transdermal routes fail to control patients' pain or are associated with unacceptable side effects. The intrathecal administration of centrally acting agents bypasses the blood-brain-barrier resulting in much higher cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) concentrations while using reduced amounts of medication to achieve equipotent doses. The intrathecal approach is associated with higher rates of satisfactory pain relief and lower rates of treatment failures and technical complications compared to the epidural route. A paucity of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) has led to concern regarding proper use, selection criteria, and safety of these devices. Cost effectiveness and comparative therapies have now also become a focus of discussion. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate and update the available evidence for the efficacy and safety of intrathecal infusions used in long-term management (> 6 months) of chronic pain. This paper will not focus on intrathecal administration for spasticity or movement disorders. STUDY DESIGN: A systematic review of intrathecal infusion through implanted drug delivery devices for chronic pain. METHODS: Literature search through EMBASE, Medline, Cochrane databases, and systematic reviews as well as peer-reviewed non-indexed journals from 1980 to December 2010. Studies are assessed using the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) criteria for observational studies and the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Review Group criteria for randomized trials. The level of evidence was determined using 5 levels of evidence, ranging from Level I to III with 3 subcategories in Level II, based on the quality of evidence developed by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF). OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure for chronic non-cancer is pain relief (short-term relief ≤ one-year and long-term > one-year), whereas it is 3 months for cancer. Secondary outcome measures of improvement in functional status, psychological status, return to work, and reduction in opioid intake. RESULTS: The level of evidence for this systematic review of non-cancer pain studies meeting the inclusion criteria of continuous use of an intrathecal drug delivery system (IDDS) for at least 12 months duration with at least 25 patients in the cohort, is Level II-3 based on USPSTF criteria. The level of evidence for this systemic review for cancer-related pain studies meeting the inclusion criteria of continuous use of IDDS for at least 3 months duration with at least 25 patients in the cohort is Level II-2 based on USPSTF criteria. CONCLUSION: Based on the available evidence, the recommendation for intrathecal infusion systems for cancer-related pain is moderate recommendation based on the high quality of evidence and the recommendation is limited to moderate based on the moderate quality of evidence from non-randomized studies for non-cancer related pain.

The prevalence, severity, and impact of opioid-induced bowel dysfunction: results of a US and European Patient Survey (PROBE 1).

OBJECTIVE: This multinational, Internet-based survey was designed to assess the prevalence, frequency, severity, and impact of opioid-induced bowel dysfunction (OBD) in patients receiving opioid therapy for chronic pain and taking laxatives. DESIGN: In total, 322 patients taking daily oral opioids and laxatives completed the 45-item questionnaire. At the time of the survey, 45% of patients reported <3 bowel movements per week. The most prevalent opioid-induced side effects were constipation (81%) and straining to pass a bowel movement (58%). Those side effects considered most bothersome by patients were (in order of rank) constipation, straining, fatigue, small or hard bowel movements, and insomnia. RESULTS: Most of the OBD symptoms specified in the questionnaire were experienced by the majority of patients >or=4 times a week. Constipation was the OBD symptom that was most often reported as severe. Most patients reported that their OBD symptoms had at least a moderate negative impact on their overall quality of life and activities of daily living. A third of patients had missed, decreased or stopped using opioids in order to make it easier to have a bowel movement. CONCLUSION: The survey findings confirm that OBD occurs frequently, despite the use of laxatives, in individuals taking daily oral opioids for chronic pain. These gastrointestinal symptoms add to the burden already experienced by chronic pain patients, negatively impacting quality of life and, in some cases, affecting opioid treatment itself.

System-related events and analgesic gaps during postoperative pain management with the fentanyl iontophoretic transdermal system and morphine intravenous patient-controlled analgesia.

BACKGROUND: Analgesic gaps (interruptions in analgesic delivery) contribute to ineffective postoperative pain management. In this analysis, we evaluated the incidence of analgesic gaps resulting from system-related events (SREs) for patients using the fentanyl iontophoretic transdermal system (ITS), a noninvasive patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) system, or morphine IV PCA for postoperative pain management. METHODS: Data were pooled from two open-label, randomized, active-controlled trials that evaluated the efficacy and safety of fentanyl ITS and morphine IV PCA after total hip replacement, abdominal, or pelvic surgery. The incidence and duration of analgesic gaps resulting from SREs were assessed, along with SRE resolution times. RESULTS: A total of 1305 patients received fentanyl ITS (n = 647) or morphine IV PCA (n = 658). Fentanyl ITS was associated with a significantly lower incidence of analgesic gaps per 100 patients compared with morphine IV PCA (5.87 vs 12.01, respectively; P < 0.001). Compared with patients receiving morphine IV PCA, patients receiving fentanyl ITS had both a numerically lower median total analgesic gap time (15.0 min vs 20.0 min) and a numerically lower median total SRE resolution time (11.0 min vs 20.0 min). Most fentanyl ITS SREs were resolved by applying a new system, whereas many different SRE resolution methods were used for morphine IV PCA. CONCLUSIONS: Fentanyl ITS was associated with a significantly lower incidence of analgesic gaps relative to morphine IV PCA. Fentanyl ITS may provide patients with fewer interruptions and more continuous analgesic delivery.