How is postoperative pain after hip and knee replacement managed? An analysis of two large hospitals in Australia.

BACKGROUND: Multimodal analgesia regimens are recommended for the postoperative period after hip and knee replacement surgeries. However, there are no data on practice patterns for analgesic use in the immediate postoperative period after hip and knee replacements in Australia. OBJECTIVES: To describe analgesic prescribing patterns in the inpatient postoperative phase for patients undergoing hip and knee replacement. METHODS: Retrospective study of electronic medical record data from two major hospitals in Sydney, Australia. We identified analgesic medication prescriptions for all patients aged 18 years and older who underwent hip or knee replacement surgery in 2019. We extracted data on pain medications prescribed while in the ward up until discharge. These were grouped into distinct categories based on the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical classification. We described the frequency (%) of pain medications used by category and computed the average oral morphine equivalent daily dose (OMEDD) during hospitalisation. RESULTS: We identified 1282 surgeries in 1225 patients. Patients had a mean (SD) age of 69 (11.8) years; most (57.1%) were female. Over 99% of patients were prescribed opioid analgesics and paracetamol during their hospital stay. Most patients (61.4%) were managed with paracetamol and opioids only. The most common prescribed opioid was oxycodone (87.3% of patients). Only 19% of patients were prescribed nonsteroidal anti-inflammatories (NSAIDs). The median (IQR) average daily OMEDD was 50.2 mg (30.3-77.9). CONCLUSION: We identified high use of opioids analgesics as the main strategies for pain control after hip and knee replacement in hospital. Other analgesics were much less frequently used, such as NSAIDs, and always in combination with opioids and paracetamol.

A digital health intervention to support patients with chronic pain during prescription opioid tapering: a pilot randomised controlled trial.

Introduction: Recent changes in opioid prescribing guidelines have led to an increasing number of patients with chronic pain being recommended to taper. However, opioid tapering can be challenging, and many patients require support. Objectives: We evaluated the feasibility, acceptability, and potential efficacy of a codesigned digital health intervention to support patients with chronic pain during voluntary prescription opioid tapering. Methods: In a pilot randomised controlled trial, participants received a psychoeducational video and 28 days of text messages (2 SMS/day) in addition to their usual care (intervention) or usual care alone (control). The feasibility, acceptability, and potential efficacy of the intervention were evaluated. The primary outcome was opioid tapering self-efficacy. Secondary outcomes were pain intensity and interference, anxiety and depression symptom severity, pain catastrophising, and pain self-efficacy. Results: Of 28 randomised participants, 26 completed the study (13 per group). Text message delivery was high (99.2%), but fidelity of video delivery was low (57.1%). Most participants rated the messages as useful, supportive, encouraging, and engaging; 78.5% would recommend the intervention to others; and 64.2% desired a longer intervention period. Tapering self-efficacy (Cohen d = 0.74) and pain self-efficacy (d = 0.41) were higher, and pain intensity (d = 0.65) and affective interference (d = 0.45) were lower in the intervention group at week 4. Conclusion: First evidence supports the feasibility, acceptability, and potentially efficacy of a psychoeducational video and SMS text messaging intervention to support patients with chronic pain during voluntary prescription opioid tapering. Definitive trials with longer intervention duration are warranted.

Management of pain in cancer patients- lessons from practices during the COVID-19: a qualitative study of cancer care providers' perspectives.

BACKGROUND: The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has impacted health systems globally and affected managing many chronic conditions, including cancer. This study aimed to explore the perceptions of multi-disciplinary cancer care providers on how cancer pain management was affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Participants were eligible if they were cancer care providers of any specialty and discipline from two tertiary hospitals in Australia. Data were collected using semi-structured interviews to explore cancer care providers' perspectives on cancer pain management within COVID-19. Thematic analysis of interview transcripts used an integrated approach that started with inductive coding before coding deductively against a behaviour framework called the COM-B Model, which proposes that 'capability', 'motivation' and 'opportunity' are requisites for any behaviour. RESULTS: Twenty-three providers participated. Five themes were developed and interpreted from the analysis of data, namely: "Telehealth enables remote access to cancer pain management but also created a digital divide", "Access to cancer pain management in the community is compromised due to the pandemic", "COVID-19 negatively impacts hospital resource allocation", "Patients were required to trade off cancer pain management against other health priorities" and "Hospital restrictions result in decreased social and psychological support for patients with cancer pain". CONCLUSIONS: The landscape of cancer pain management in the Australian health system underwent substantial shifts during the COVID-19 pandemic, with lasting impacts. Cancer care providers perceived the pandemic to have significant adverse effects on pain management across multiple levels, with repercussions for patients experiencing cancer-related pain. A more adaptive health system model needs to be established in the future to accommodate vulnerable cancer patients.

Text messaging intervention to support patients with chronic pain during prescription opioid tapering: protocol for a double-blind randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Increases in pain and interference with quality of life is a common concern among people with chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) who are tapering opioid medications. Research indicates that access to social and psychological support for pain self-management may help people to reduce their opioid dose without increasing pain and interference. This study evaluates the efficacy of a text messaging intervention designed to provide people with CNCP with social and psychological support for pain self-management while tapering long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) under the guidance of their prescriber. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A double-blind randomised controlled trial will be conducted. Patients with CNCP (n=74) who are tapering LTOT will be enrolled from across Australia. Participants will continue with their usual care while tapering LTOT under the supervision of their prescribing physician. They will randomly receive either a psychoeducational video and supportive text messaging (two Short Message Service (SMS) per day) for 12 weeks or the video only. The primary outcome is the pain intensity and interference assessed by the Pain, Enjoyment of Life and General Activity scale. Secondary outcomes include mood, self-efficacy, pain cognitions, opioid dose reduction, withdrawal symptoms, and acceptability, feasibility, and safety of the intervention. Participants will complete questionnaires at baseline and then every 4 weeks for 12 weeks and will be interviewed at week 12. This trial will provide evidence for the efficacy of a text messaging intervention to support patients with CNCP who are tapering LTOT. If proven to be efficacious and safe, this low-cost intervention can be implemented at scale. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol was reviewed and approved by the Northern Sydney Local Health District (Australia). Study results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at scientific and professional meetings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12622001423707.

Tolerability and Efficacy of a 10:25 Preparation of Δ9-Tetrahydrocannabinol and Cannabidiol for Treatment of Chronic Back or Neck Pain: A Multiple-Dose Escalation Study.

Introduction: The aim was to demonstrate the safety and tolerability of cannabidiol (CBD) with Δ9-THC in patients with moderate to severe chronic back or neck pain unresponsive to over-the-counter non-opioid analgesics. Methods: This was a non-randomized, single-arm, open-label study. Participants received escalating doses of an oromucosal-administered combination containing 10 mg/mL of Δ9-THC, 25 mg/mL of CBD. On day 1, patients received once-daily 0.5 mL Cybis® 10:25 (5 mg Δ9-THC plus 12.5 mg CBD daily), escalated at days 8, 15, and 22 to 0.5 mL twice-daily (bd) (10 mg Δ9-THC plus 25 mg CBD daily), 1.0 mL bd (20 mg Δ9-THC plus 50 mg CBD daily), and 1.5 mL bd (30 mg Δ9-THC plus 75 mg CBD daily), respectively. The primary outcome was safety and tolerability, with secondary objectives including pharmacokinetic and efficacy outcomes. Results: 28 patients were enrolled in the study. Their median age was 63.3 years, and half were female. The median history of neck/back pain was 10 years. The pharmacokinetics following single doses of 0.5 mL were variable; however, there were dose-dependent increases in trough levels of CBD and Δ9-THC. Cybis® 10:25 was well tolerated, with the majority of adverse events of mild severity. The most common adverse events were nausea, vomiting, fatigue, dizziness, headache, paresthesia, and anxiety. There were dose-dependent improvements in numerical pain rating scores (p < 0.001), with clinically significant reductions in pain at 1.0 mL bd and 1.5 mL bd doses (28.8% and 34.1% reductions, respectively, p < 0.001). Depressive symptoms and stress had dose-dependent reductions (p = 0.0182, p < 0.01, respectively). Conclusion: In patients with chronic neck/back pain, CBD and Δ9-THC are well tolerated and doses of 1.0 mL bd and 1.5 mL bd showed clinically significant reductions in pain compared to baseline pain scores.

A digital health intervention to support patients with chronic pain during prescription opioid tapering: a pilot randomised controlled trial.

Introduction: Recent changes in opioid prescribing guidelines have led to an increasing number of patients with chronic pain being recommended to taper. However, opioid tapering can be challenging, and many patients require support. Objectives: We evaluated the feasibility, acceptability, and potential efficacy of a co-designed psycho-educational video and SMS text messaging intervention to support patients with chronic pain during prescription opioid tapering. Methods: A pilot randomised controlled trial was conducted. In addition to their usual care, participants in the intervention group received a psycho-educational video and 28 days of text messages (two SMS/day). The control group received usual care. The feasibility, acceptability, and potential efficacy of the intervention were evaluated. The primary outcome was opioid tapering self-efficacy. Secondary outcomes were pain intensity and interference, anxiety and depression symptom severity, pain catastrophising, and pain self-efficacy. Results: Of 28 randomised participants, 26 completed the study (13 in each group). Text message delivery was 99.2% successful. Most participants rated the messages as useful, supportive, encouraging, and engaging, 78.5% would recommend the intervention to others, and 64% desired a longer intervention period. Tapering self-efficacy (Cohen's d = 0.74) and pain self-efficacy (d = 0.41) were higher and pain intensity (d = 0.65) and affective interference (d = 0.45) lower in the intervention group at week 4. Conclusions: It is feasible, acceptable, and potentially efficacious to support patients with chronic pain during prescription opioid tapering with a psycho-educational video and SMS text messaging intervention. A definitive trial has been initiated to test a 12-week intervention.

Prevalence and management of chronic nonmalignant pain in palliative care populations: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the prevalence and current approaches to clinical management of chronic nonmalignant pain in patients referred to palliative care services. METHODS: A systematic review was performed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021205432). Six databases were searched on 25 August 2020 and again on 11 July 2022: PubMed and Ovid MEDLINE, Elsevier Scopus, PsychINFO, the Cochrane Library, and CINAHL. Search included prevalence or intervention studies with patients who had chronic nonmalignant pain and were referred to palliative care services. Screening was undertaken independently by 2 reviewers. RESULTS: The searches returned 417 titles; subsequent screening identified 5 eligible studies, 4 from the USA and 1 from Hong Kong, including 2 cohort and 3 cross-sectional studies. Sample sizes ranged from 137 to 323, with a total of 1,056 patients. The prevalence of chronic nonmalignant pain ranged from 14% to 34% across different palliative care settings. There was significant crossover of pain types; 54% of patients with chronic no-malignant pain had additional cancer-related pain or cancer treatment-related pain. Opioids were used to manage stand-alone chronic nonmalignant pain for 39% of patients compared to 58% with mixed chronic nonmalignant pain and other pain diagnoses. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: Five studies have documented the prevalence of chronic nonmalignant pain of 14-34% in palliative care. Further research including prevalence and treatment studies would provide clearer evidence for best practice management of chronic nonmalignant pain in the palliative care setting.

A Digital Video and Text Messaging Intervention to Support People With Chronic Pain During Opioid Tapering: Content Development Using Co-design.

BACKGROUND: People living with chronic pain report that tapering prescribed opioids is challenging and more support is needed. In our formative research, consumers indicated that mobile health (mHealth) technology could be an acceptable form of support for opioid tapering and may improve tapering self-efficacy. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate and improve the content of an mHealth intervention before pilot-testing, based on consumer and clinician feedback. METHODS: Participants were 12 consumers and 12 clinicians who evaluated an initial draft of a video script and 90 SMS text messages. Consumers and clinicians rated the appropriateness and likely usefulness (consumers) or likely effectiveness (clinicians) of a video script and a random selection of 15 SMS text messages using a 5-point Likert-type scale (1=totally disagree; 5=totally agree). Each draft SMS text message was reviewed by 2 consumers and 2 clinicians. Texts were deemed acceptable for inclusion in the pilot intervention only if the summed participant ratings of text appropriateness and usefulness or effectiveness were ≥8. Participants were also invited to provide open-text feedback on the draft script and SMS text messages. RESULTS: Consumers generally agreed that the draft video script and text content were likely to be appropriate (video: mean 4.4, SD 0.52; text: mean 4.3, SD 0.79) and useful (video: mean 4.3, SD 0.65; text: mean 4.2, SD 0.84). Similarly, clinicians generally agreed that the draft video script and text content were likely to be appropriate (video: mean 4.5, SD 0.67; text: mean 4.4, SD 0.81) and effective (video: mean 4.0, SD 0.43; text: mean 4.3, SD 0.76). Overall, 77% (69/90) of the draft texts met the threshold rating for acceptability for inclusion in the pilot test of mHealth intervention by consumers, and 82% (74/90) met the threshold for acceptability by clinicians. Consumers' and clinicians' ratings were used to rank order the texts. The top 56 draft texts (all meeting the threshold levels of acceptability) were selected for inclusion in the pilot intervention. When consumer or clinician feedback was provided, the texts meeting the criteria for inclusion in the pilot were further revised and improved. Feedback on the video script was also used to further improve the acceptability of the video script before pilot-testing the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: This study describes the process by which a 28-day mHealth intervention to support patients with chronic pain to taper opioid medications was evaluated and improved before pilot-testing. The mHealth intervention consisted of a 10-minute psychoeducational video about pain and opioid tapering and 56 unique SMS text messages providing information and reassurance (texts delivered twice per day for 28 days). Having established that the content of the mHealth intervention is acceptable to both consumer and clinician groups, the mHealth intervention will be piloted in future research.

Psychosocial characteristics of chronic pain in cancer survivors referred to an Australian multidisciplinary pain clinic.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the clinical and psychosocial characteristics of chronic pain in cancer survivors referred to one Australian hospital's ambulatory pain clinic over a 7-year period (2013-19), and to compare cancer treatment-related pain with comorbid non-malignant pain. METHOD: Retrospective chart review including responses to standardized self-report questionnaires (Brief Pain Inventory, Depression Anxiety Stress Scale, Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire, Pain Catastrophizing Scale), routinely collected in all patients referred to pain clinics at Australian and New Zealand hospitals. RESULTS: Of 3510 new referrals during the study period, 267 (7.5%) had a history of cancer and 176 (5.0%) met the study's eligibility criteria. Their average age was 63 ± 13 years, with 55% female. Breast cancer survivors were commonest, followed by hematological, prostate, melanoma, and colorectal, a median of 3 years post-diagnosis. Pain was attributed to cancer treatment in 87 (49%), surgery being the commonest modality. Multimodal treatment (n = 89, 58%) was significantly commoner in the treatment-related pain group (p < 0.001). Average pain severity was moderate, as was pain-related disability and distress. Pain cognitions were often maladaptive (low pain self-efficacy, high pain catastrophizing), predicted by pre-existing anxiety and depression. Associations between pain cognitions and outcomes were medium-to-large. Differences between treatment pain and comorbid pain were small-to-medium. Their scores were similar to Australian pain clinic norms. CONCLUSION: Cancer treatment causes tissue damage, but pain-related distress and disability in survivors is associated with maladaptive pain cognitions. Survivors with poor pain outcomes should be evaluated for unhelpful thoughts and beliefs especially when they have pre-existing depression or anxiety.

Evaluating acceptability and feasibility of a mobile health intervention to improve self-efficacy in prescription opioid tapering in patients with chronic pain: protocol for a pilot randomised, single-blind, controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Opioid medications are no longer recommended as long-term therapy for chronic non-cancer pain, and many patients are advised to reduce or discontinue opioid medications. Many patients report difficulties in tapering opioid medications, necessitating supporting interventions. This protocol describes a pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT) to investigate the acceptability, feasibility and potential efficacy of a mobile health intervention to improve the opioid tapering self-efficacy of patients with chronic non-cancer pain. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The trial will be a single-blind (clinician, data collector and statistician-blinded) pilot RCT with two parallel arms. Forty adult patients with chronic non-cancer pain who are voluntarily reducing their prescribed opioid medications under medical guidance will be recruited from two tertiary pain clinics (Start date 25 August 2021). Participants will be randomly assigned to an intervention or control group. Both groups will receive usual care, including multidisciplinary pain management. In addition to usual care, the intervention group will receive a short informational and testimonial video about opioid tapering and will receive two specifically text messages per day for 28 days. The intervention is codesigned with patients and clinicians to provide evidence-based informational, motivational and emotional support to patients with chronic pain to taper opioid medications. Feasibility of the intervention and a future definitive RCT will be evaluated by measuring patient acceptability, delivery of the intervention, rates and reasons of exclusions and drop-outs, completion rates and missing data in the study questionnaires, and obtaining estimates for sample size determination. Potential efficacy will be evaluated by comparing changes in opioid tapering self-efficacy between the two groups. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol was reviewed and approved by the Northern Sydney Local Health District (Australia). Study results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at scientific and professional meetings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12621000795897.

Efficacy of interventions to reduce long term opioid treatment for chronic non-cancer pain: systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To review interventions to reduce long term opioid treatment in people with chronic non-cancer pain, considering efficacy on dose reduction and discontinuation, pain, function, quality of life, withdrawal symptoms, substance use, and adverse events. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies of interventions. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library searched from inception to July 2021. Reference lists and previous reviews were also searched and experts were contacted. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR STUDY SELECTION: Original research in English. Case reports and cross sectional studies were excluded. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two authors independently selected studies, extracted data, and used the Cochrane risk-of-bias tools for randomised and non-randomised studies (RoB 2 and ROBINS-I). Authors grouped interventions into five categories (pain self-management, complementary and alternative medicine, pharmacological and biomedical devices and interventions, opioid replacement treatment, and deprescription methods), estimated pooled effects using random effects meta-analytical models, and appraised the certainty of evidence using GRADE (grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation). RESULTS: Of 166 studies meeting inclusion criteria, 130 (78%) were considered at critical risk of bias and were excluded from the evidence synthesis. Of the 36 included studies, few had comparable treatment arms and sample sizes were generally small. Consequently, the certainty of the evidence was low or very low for more than 90% (41/44) of GRADE outcomes, including for all non-opioid patient outcomes. Despite these limitations, evidence of moderate certainty indicated that interventions to support prescribers' adherence to guidelines increased the likelihood of patients discontinuing opioid treatment (adjusted odds ratio 1.5, 95% confidence interval 1.0 to 2.1), and that these prescriber interventions as well as pain self-management programmes reduced opioid dose more than controls (intervention v control, mean difference -6.8 mg (standard error 1.6) daily oral morphine equivalent, P<0.001; pain programme v control, -14.31 mg daily oral morphine equivalent, 95% confidence interval -21.57 to -7.05). CONCLUSIONS: Evidence on the reduction of long term opioid treatment for chronic pain continues to be constrained by poor study methodology. Of particular concern is the lack of evidence relating to possible harms. Agreed standards for designing and reporting studies on the reduction of opioid treatment are urgently needed. REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020140943.

Pharmacologic Management of Persistent Pain in Cancer Survivors.

Improvements in screening, diagnosis and treatment of cancer has seen cancer mortality substantially diminish in the past three decades. It is estimated there are almost 20 million cancer survivors in the USA alone, but some 40% live with chronic pain after completing treatment. While a broad definition of survivorship that includes all people living with, through and beyond a cancer diagnosis-including those with active cancer-is often used, this narrative review primarily focuses on the management of pain in people who are disease-free after completing primary cancer treatment as adults. Chronic pain in this population needs a different approach to that used for people with a limited prognosis. After describing the common chronic pain syndromes caused by cancer treatment, and the pathophysiologic mechanisms involved, the pharmacologic management of entities such as post-surgical pain, chemotherapy-induced neuropathy, aromatase inhibitor musculoskeletal syndrome and checkpoint inhibitor-related pain are described. The challenges  associated with opioid prescribing in this population are given special attention. Expert guidelines on pain management in cancer survivors now recommend a combination of pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic modalities, and these are also briefly covered.

A qualitative trajectory analysis of patients' experiences tapering opioids for chronic pain.

ABSTRACT: Tapering opioids for chronic pain can be challenging for both patients and prescribers, both of whom may be unsure of what to expect in terms of pain, distress, activity interference, and withdrawal symptoms over the first few weeks and months of the taper. To better prepare clinicians to provide patient-centred tapering support, the current research used prospective longitudinal qualitative methods to capture individual-level variation in patients' experience over the first few months of a voluntary physician-guided taper. The research aimed to identify patterns in individuals' experience of tapering and explore whether patient characteristics, readiness to taper, opioid tapering self-efficacy, or psychosocial context were related to tapering trajectory. Twenty-one patients with chronic noncancer pain commencing tapering of long-term opioid therapy were recruited from a metropolitan tertiary pain clinic (n = 13) and a regional primary care practice (n = 8). Semistructured phone interviews were conducted a mean of 8 times per participant over a mean duration of 12 weeks (N = 173). Four opioid-tapering trajectories were identified, which we characterised as thriving, resilient, surviving, and distressed. High and low readiness to taper was a defining characteristic of thriving and distressed trajectories, respectively. Life adversity was a prominent theme of resilient and distressed trajectories, with supportive relationships buffering the effects of adversity for those who followed a resilient trajectory. Discussion focuses on the implications of these findings for the preparation and support of patients with chronic pain who are commencing opioid tapering.

mHealth Interventions to Support Prescription Opioid Tapering in Patients With Chronic Pain: Qualitative Study of Patients' Perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic pain who are tapering prescription opioids report a need for greater support for coping with symptoms of pain and withdrawal. Mobile health (mHealth) technologies (SMS text messaging- or app-based) have the potential to provide patients with educational, emotional, and motivational support for opioid tapering beyond what is offered by their health care provider. However, it is not known whether patients with chronic pain who are tapering opioids would be willing or able to engage with technology-based support. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to examine patients' use of mobile technologies in health care, interest in using mHealth support, preferences for the form and content of mHealth support, and potential barriers to and facilitators of engagement with mHealth support for opioid tapering. METHODS: A total of 21 patients (11 women and 10 men; age range 29-83 years) with chronic noncancer pain on long-term opioid therapy who had recently initiated a voluntary opioid taper were recruited from primary and tertiary care clinics in metropolitan and regional Australia for a larger study of patients' experiences of opioid tapering. Participants had been taking prescription opioids for a mean duration of 13 (SD 9.6; range 0.25-30) years at the time of the study. Survey items characterized participants' typical mobile phone use and level of interest in mobile technology-based support for opioid tapering. Semistructured interviews further explored patients' use of mobile technologies and their interest in, preferences for, and perspectives on potential barriers to and facilitators of engagement with mHealth support for opioid tapering. Two researchers collaborated to conduct a thematic analysis of the interview data. RESULTS: All participants reported owning and using a mobile phone, and most (17/21, 81%) participants reported using mobile apps. The majority of participants expressed interest in SMS text messaging-based (17/21, 81%) and app-based (15/21, 71%) support for opioid tapering. Participants expected that messages delivering both informational and socioemotional support would be helpful. Participants expected that access to technology, mobile reception, internet connectivity, vision impairment, and low self-efficacy for using apps may be barriers to user engagement. Patients expected that continuity of care from their health care provider, flexible message dosing, responsivity, and familiarity with pain self-management strategies would increase user engagement. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study indicate that patients with chronic noncancer pain may be willing to engage with SMS text messaging-based and app-based mHealth interventions to support opioid tapering. However, the feasibility and acceptability of these interventions may depend on how patients' preferences for functionality, content, and design are addressed.

Prognostic value of the Memorial Sloan Kettering Prognostic Score in metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The Memorial Sloan Kettering Prognostic Score (MPS), a composite of the neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and albumin, is an objective prognostic tool created as a more readily available alternative to the Glasgow Prognostic Score. A prior analysis of patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPDAC) suggested that the MPS may predict survival, although it did not control for clinically relevant factors. METHODS: MPS scores were calculated for patients with mPDAC treated at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2014. An MPS scale of 0 to 2 was used: 0 for an albumin level ≥ 4 g/dL and an NLR ≤ 4 g/dL, 1 for either an albumin level < 4 g/dL or an NLR > 4 g/dL, and 2 for an albumin level < 4 g/dL and an NLR > 4 g/dL. Performance status, antineoplastic therapy, presence of thromboembolism (TE), radiation therapy, and metastatic sites were also analyzed. The associations with overall survival were examined with time-dependent Cox proportional hazards regression analyses. RESULTS: A multivariate model revealed that higher MPS scores at diagnosis (hazard ratio for MPS of 2 vs MPS of 0, 1.41; 95% confidence interval, 1.13-1.76), liver metastases, radiation therapy, hospital admissions, TE, and performance status were associated with worse overall survival. The median overall survival for patients with MPS scores of 0, 1, and 2 were 12.9, 9.0, and 5.4 months, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The MPS, an easily calculated composite of the NLR and albumin, is an objective tool that may predict survival in mPDAC independently of performance status, disease characteristics, and cancer therapy. LAY SUMMARY: The Memorial Sloan Kettering Prognostic Score (MPS) is a new scoring system that incorporates markers of inflammation found in individuals' blood at the diagnosis of metastatic pancreatic cancer. Data suggest that the MPS may help to determine prognosis.

A randomised, double blind, placebo-controlled trial of megestrol acetate or dexamethasone in treating symptomatic anorexia in people with advanced cancer.

This multi-site, double blind, parallel arm, fixed dose, randomised placebo controlled phase III study compared megestrol acetate 480 mg/day with dexamethasone 4 mg/day for their net effects on appetite in people with cancer anorexia. Patients with advanced cancer and anorexia for ≥ 2 weeks with a score ≤ 4 (0-10 numeric rating scale (NRS) 0 = no appetite, 10 = best possible appetite) were recruited. Participants received megestrol 480 mg or dexamethasone 4 mg or placebo daily for up to 4 weeks. Primary outcomes were at day 7. Responders were defined as having a ≥ 25% improvement in NRS over baseline. There were 190 people randomised (megestrol acetate n = 61; dexamethasone n = 67, placebo n = 62). At week 1 (primary endpoint), 79·3% in the megestrol group, 65·5% in the dexamethasone group and 58·5% in the placebo group (p = 0.067) were responders. No differences in performance status or quality of life were reported. Treatment emergent adverse events were frequent (90·4% of participants), and included altered mood and insomnia. Hyperglycemia and deep vein thromboses were more frequent when on dexamethasone than the other two arms. There was no difference in groups between the three arms, with no benefit seen over placebo with anorexia improving in all arms.Trail registration: The trial was registered on 19/08/2008 with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12608000405314).

Deprescribing long-term opioid therapy in patients with chronic pain.

Proposed regulatory changes will limit the access to opioids by Australian patients with chronic pain, many of whom are under the care of consultant physicians. This review summarises points of consensus on opioid deprescribing that emerged from the interaction of an expert panel and the audience at a symposium on the topic held in Sydney in 2019. Each of these consensus points speaks to the need for an individualised, patient-centred approach. In other words, 'treat the patient, not the pill count'.

Transition from acute to chronic pain: where cells, systems and society meet.

Current treatments for chronic pain are often ineffective. At the same as searching for novel therapeutics, there is growing interest in preventing acute pain becoming chronic. While the field is still in its infancy, its knowledge base is increasingly expanding. Certainly, biomedical factors, for example, the type of tissue damage, are important but they are often not modifiable. Psychosocial risk factors (e.g., thoughts and beliefs about pain, mood, social support, workplace problems) are modifiable. There is an increasing body of research that cognitive behavioral therapy can prevent transition. Internet-based delivery of cognitive behavioral therapy improves access. Clinicians need to be aware that they may inadvertently promote pain chronification in their patients by what they say and do.

Screening Patients With Cancer Admitted to Hanoi Medical University Hospital for Palliative Care Needs.

PURPOSE: To evaluate a screening tool for identifying which patients admitted to the oncology ward of a Vietnamese hospital should be referred to specialist palliative care (PC). METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional survey of consecutive patients hospitalized in the Department of Oncology and Palliative Care at Hanoi Medical University Hospital between June 2019 and September 2019. We translated a validated 11-item screening tool into Vietnamese and used a total score of ≥ 5 as a positive screen. RESULTS: One hundred participants were recruited. Forty-four patients (44%) screened positive. Of these, 37 (84%) had locally advanced or metastatic disease, 31 (70%) had uncontrolled symptoms, and 43 (98%) requested a PC consultation. A score ≥ 5 was significantly more common in patients with stage IV disease versus earlier stage, performance status of Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) 2 versus ECOG 0, and when life-limiting complications of cancer were present. Screening identified four patients overlooked by oncologists as needing referral, and 34% of patients requesting a referral had scores < 5. CONCLUSION: This screening tool provided oncologists with easy-to-use criteria for referring patients for PC. At the same time, it relieved the work load for under-resourced PC physicians by screening out requests with low-level need. This tool should be part of routine assessment on admission in all oncology units in Vietnam.